Racial Inequality In The United States

Racial inequality is a very real situation in the United States. From Ferguson, Missouri to Baltimore, and Chicago to California, there have been extreme situations of racial inequality showing it’s true colors. Now more then ever, people are bombarded with videos and news stories of extreme violence against a minority, yet are completely ignorant to the fact that crimes happen the other way around. While it is true that minorities have faced many hardships in America, how much of it is valid, and how much is brought on by their own prejudices? There is no denying that racial inequality happens, and that minorities have faced extreme hardships throughout the history of the U.S. Slavery and segregation have proved that. But how much
of it still exists in the United States? Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody brought forth some statistics about White versus African American stop and frisk tactics. “The key influence on who is stopped in traffic safety stops is how you drive; in investigatory stops it is who you are, and being black is the leading influence” (Epp and Maynard-Moody, 2014). Such statistics are almost staggering, however how can the readers know how authentic the finding are? A personal friend of mine was a police officer in a very African-American heavy part of LA. His department was always under scrutiny for their statistics because they issued more offenses to minorities than whites. However, with the population being close to 98% minority in his jurisdiction, how could he possibly even out the offences between Whites and Minorities?
There are so many articles that try to prove and disprove the extreme segregation problems in this country, however, the arguments provided in the course curriculum are extremely one sided. Much like Epp and Maynard-Moody, the published authors argue for the racial inequality complications this county faces. While Inequality is still an issue many people face, is there such thing as bigoted minorities?
Such a question might just be impossible to answer. It would be easy to use snippets from the articles provided in the curriculum, like a quote from Richard Rothstein stating, “Although policies to impose segregation are no longer explicit, their effect endures. When we blame private prejudice and snobbishness for contemporary segregation, we not only whitewash history but avoid considering whether new policies might instead promote an integrated community. (Rothstein, 2014). Or even a finding by Elaine Mcardle which argues, “during Black Bike Week, the city shut down one lane of traffic on Pacific Boulevard, forcing bikers to wait in queue for their turn to cruise and causing long traffic jams. Myrtle Beach tripled the number of police on duty, ticketed bikers for minor infractions, and even (unsuccessfully) petitioned the governor to send in the National Guard” (Mcardle, 2008). Both arguments heavily focus their subjects on white to black discrimination, but it is hard to find one that argues the opposite, even though there is such a problem in our culture. Let’s take Michael Brown into consideration for a moment; a young African American man who was shot by a white officer. The official story of what happened exactly may never be known, but a criminal shot by a cop attracted more attention by the media and even our president than any of the black on white crimes committed in the US. Anymore, this country’s youth is taught that breaking the law is okay as long as you resist arrest. Oh also as long as you are a black citizen facing a white police officer. Heck, the president himself might even make a statement about you, and send representatives to your funeral. But what about the many crimes committed against law abiding white citizens? An illegal alien in California murdered Kathryn Steinle. “In broad daylight outside of Pier 14 this past Wednesday, 32-year-old Kathryn "Kate" Steinle was shot and killed by Francisco Sanchez, an illegal immigrant who had previously been deported from the United States five times” (Rousselle, 2015). With the rolls being reversed in this situation, there was a significantly different response to the crime from our leaders are “Kate’s” fellow race. There were no riots in San Francisco, the media barely acknowledged it’s occurrence, and our “fearless” leader acted as if it never happened.
What started as an informative essay, turned into a very personal subject with my own opinions.
As a young white female, I will always admit that I do not know what it is like to live as a minority. However, I do recognize a problem in this country when there is one; especially one as concerning as the claim of horrible police brutality against minorities in this country. I personally believe the statements from our president have only fueled the fire. However, just as I have my beliefs, there is no denying that people have contradicting principles. Who am I to judge what others believe to be a monumental issue in the United
States?

Part 2

Is the definition of terrorism impossible to reach? Since we cannot offer a true or correct definition of terrorism. Certainly this is true for many of the objects of social science, and social class for example, which are defined differently according to opposing theories.
Terrorism is not merely a matter of explosives.
A bomb thrown against a military target is a horrible thing, and may result in tragedy, but it is not by itself an act of terrorism. Neither is terrorism simply a matter of ideology. The ramming of a police station by a truck loaded with C4 does not become an act of terrorism simply because the explosive was packed by a fanatic’s hands, or the vehicle was driven by a true believer. Again the act is unconscious, and again the consequences may be terrible, but it is not necessarily the work of a terrorist. It is time to remind ourselves, what defines terrorism is the use of violence against the innocent, to achieve political, certain beliefs, or religious ends. The conversion of a commercial airplane into a weapon, the destruction of a crowded office tower, or the parking of a car bomb outside a heavily trafficked restaurant. These are doubtless acts of terrorism, but so is the shooting of entire residential areas, whose only sin is to crowd one house hiding, suspected enemies of the state. The equipment of authority seems to demand an, us versus them
approach.
This outlook found its common devise in US President George W. Bush’s speech before the US Congress after the Sept. 11 attacks. “Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime” (Bush, 2001).
“The FBI believes that terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (What we Investigate, 2010).
Terrorism is a major problem in this day and age. There have been many attempts to overthrow one another (country versus country). As of right now the United States in the highest power, with the land of the most opportunity.
Terrorism can be controlled to a certain extent, but there are times when the threat becomes more deadly than anyone could imagine. There are ways to try and prevent an attack, but the best thing to do is to be prepared, watch the news, and be aware of our country’s current situation with other nations.