Welcome to the court of public opinion where YOU are the judge
The court of public opinion is something that we all participate in on a daily basis. The unfortunate thing about this court is that judgments are made way before all the facts are presented.
Would this be considered reverse discrimination?
If you would have mentioned reverse discrimination to me years ago and chances are, I would have laughed in your face. This article that I came across the other day makes a very strong case for this silent trend. In short, a newly elected sheriff in Clayton County, Georgia decided that one on the first things he was going to do on his first day was to clean house. The article does not say, but it is believed that his reason behind firing these sheriff office employees was strictly due to poor job performance. Among the fired employees were 4 high ranking deputies. Not only were these now former employees escorted out of the building, but snipers were placed on the roof of the police station keeping a close eye on these former employees.
“Generally, the racial makeup of the dismissals varied. But four of the highest-ranking employees fired were white deputies… (more…)â€Â
The new sheriff is Black.
In addition, this new sheriff will be replacing the four former White deputies with four blacks.
Things to consider while you formulate your opinion:
*Clayton County is a predominately black area
*We are provided very little history of this police department (were there any cases of discrimination within this department?)
*Why replace four white deputies with four blacks?
*Was the use of snipers absolutely necessary?
Afterthoughts:
*Would the media have given this more coverage is the sheriff was white and the deputies were black?
*If so, is that fair?
Your thoughts, please…


January 6th, 2005 at 11:56 am
First and foremost, I do not believe in “reverse” discrimination. Is discrimination
only discrimination if it is a minority being discriminated? I don’t think so. One thing
about this article that I thought was interesting was that it repeatedly mentioned a
“conflict” but it would not mention what EXACTLY the conflict was. Would the media
have reported this so-called “reverse discrimination” against whites? I do not know
for sure. It is a difficult to make an assumption on so little information.
January 6th, 2005 at 12:14 pm
You bring up a good point. For years, the word “discrimination” has been normally associated with white oppression towards people of color. Discrimination by definition is as follows: “unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice.” It’s something how a word can have an assumed meaning.
January 6th, 2005 at 12:28 pm
April is absolutely right, discrimination is discrimination, period.
Yes, the media would have been all over this guy if the races were reversed. What’s up with the snipers?
Is it discrimination? I need more info. Are the 4 senior deputies corrupt? This new sherriff could be doing a good thing, but our racial hang-ups stop us from getting from the truth.
January 6th, 2005 at 5:51 pm
If they want segregation they can have it.