Should the NAACP come in and protest this Taco Bell franchise for closing as school lets out?

[laughing dog]

As a card-carrying member of the NAACP...yeah, that's about right.

But I'm still confused. If kids come out of school and fight, daily, directly outside of some Taco Bell, and the Taco Bell decides to close up shop because of that, or because of damage to their store...what's the issue? I guess, at this point, my answer to the question given by the OP is "No." And I don't really see how race is an issue. This isn't like those cases where someone freaked out over a black person walking down the street, or sitting in public. There's actual crime involved, it should be handled as such.

When you take the disparate-impact approach to evaluating what is discrimination this qualifies.

Since a disparate-impact approach is used as an indicator for possible discrimination, not as sole proof, your analysis is based on a faulty reasoning.

Blacks are losing after-school access to a Taco Bell, whites are not. Discrimination.

What evidence do you have that that Taco Bell does not serve white people?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Whites can get food from Taco Bell that's closed? Is that some sort of Southern thing? It doesn't happen around here.

The Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing.

are you sure?

 

[Arctish]

Whites can get food from Taco Bell that's closed? Is that some sort of Southern thing? It doesn't happen around here.

The Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing.

So?

Both blacks and whites are losing access to that particular Taco Bell until the ongoing criminal activity is dealt with by the police. Seems perfectly fair to me.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

When you take the disparate-impact approach to evaluating what is discrimination this qualifies.

Since a disparate-impact approach is used as an indicator for possible discrimination, not as sole proof, your analysis is based on a faulty reasoning.

Plenty of people on here have used disparate impact at as proof of discrimination, nothing more needed.

Blacks are losing after-school access to a Taco Bell, whites are not. Discrimination.

What evidence do you have that that Taco Bell does not serve white people?

You misunderstand.

I never said Taco Bell does not serve white people. I'm saying Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing after school.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Since a disparate-impact approach is used as an indicator for possible discrimination, not as sole proof, your analysis is based on a faulty reasoning.

Plenty of people on here have used disparate impact at as proof of discrimination, nothing more needed.

Blacks are losing after-school access to a Taco Bell, whites are not. Discrimination.

What evidence do you have that that Taco Bell does not serve white people?

You misunderstand.

I never said Taco Bell does not serve white people. I'm saying Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing after school.

So Taco Bells across the country are closing at 3:00pm if they are near mostly black schools? And the blackness of the school is the reason?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Plenty of people on here have used disparate impact at as proof of discrimination, nothing more needed.

Blacks are losing after-school access to a Taco Bell, whites are not. Discrimination.

What evidence do you have that that Taco Bell does not serve white people?

You misunderstand.

I never said Taco Bell does not serve white people. I'm saying Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing after school.

So Taco Bells across the country are closing at 3:00pm if they are near mostly black schools? And the blackness of the school is the reason?

You just don't want to admit that this is an example of something non-discriminatory having a disparate impact.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Plenty of people on here have used disparate impact at as proof of discrimination, nothing more needed.

Blacks are losing after-school access to a Taco Bell, whites are not. Discrimination.

What evidence do you have that that Taco Bell does not serve white people?

You misunderstand.

I never said Taco Bell does not serve white people. I'm saying Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing after school.

So Taco Bells across the country are closing at 3:00pm if they are near mostly black schools? And the blackness of the school is the reason?

You just don't want to admit that this is an example of something non-discriminatory having a disparate impact.

have I said that closing the taco bell is discriminatory?

I am not the one here who is afraid to admit to something.

 

[laughing dog]

Since a disparate-impact approach is used as an indicator for possible discrimination, not as sole proof, your analysis is based on a faulty reasoning.

Plenty of people on here have used disparate impact at as proof of discrimination, nothing more needed.

Really? Do you have a link or two?

You misunderstand.

I never said Taco Bell does not serve white people. I'm saying Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing after school.

If all of the Taco Bells are not closing, then clearly blacks are not losing after-school access to a Taco Bell unless you think Taco Bells near white schools do not serve blacks.

 

[Godless Raven]

Holyhottopicsbatman. While I can understand where several of you are coming from...I can't for any reason I can think of, take sides with any argument that suggests Taco Bell's need to be open more hours.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Plenty of people on here have used disparate impact at as proof of discrimination, nothing more needed.

Blacks are losing after-school access to a Taco Bell, whites are not. Discrimination.

What evidence do you have that that Taco Bell does not serve white people?

You misunderstand.

I never said Taco Bell does not serve white people. I'm saying Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing after school.

So Taco Bells across the country are closing at 3:00pm if they are near mostly black schools? And the blackness of the school is the reason?

You just don't want to admit that this is an example of something non-discriminatory having a disparate impact.

Huh?

 

[Mumbles]

As a card-carrying member of the NAACP...yeah, that's about right.

But I'm still confused. If kids come out of school and fight, daily, directly outside of some Taco Bell, and the Taco Bell decides to close up shop because of that, or because of damage to their store...what's the issue? I guess, at this point, my answer to the question given by the OP is "No." And I don't really see how race is an issue. This isn't like those cases where someone freaked out over a black person walking down the street, or sitting in public. There's actual crime involved, it should be handled as such.

When you take the disparate-impact approach to evaluating what is discrimination this qualifies.

Blacks are losing after-school access to a Taco Bell, whites are not. Discrimination.

I don't see how this qualifies as disparate impact in any way. That's when you put in place a policy that unjustly punishes people who do nothing wrong. "These kids show up every day at the same time and run up in my store and smash the place up" strikes me as a very good reason to simply close the seating area at that time of day.

Also, you really think no business in the country near a high school modifies their security when white kids get out? C'mon, dawg.

 

[Mumbles]

As a card-carrying member of the NAACP...yeah, that's about right.

But I'm still confused. If kids come out of school and fight, daily, directly outside of some Taco Bell, and the Taco Bell decides to close up shop because of that, or because of damage to their store...what's the issue? I guess, at this point, my answer to the question given by the OP is "No." And I don't really see how race is an issue. This isn't like those cases where someone freaked out over a black person walking down the street, or sitting in public. There's actual crime involved, it should be handled as such.

But if we treat this as we would any crime, then we couldn't bring in the NAACP, and then blame the NAACP for coming in, and ...

BENGHAZI!!!

Heh. I think that many people don't get is that they generally choose their battles carefully. Granted, they don't always choose wisely (LA branch, I'm looking at you!), and of course there are mistakes. There will be with any such organization. And again, every criticism you made is true.

But those kids shouldn't be fighting there...or anywhere, really. Get the cops to put a couple of officer there whenever the school breaks out, and that'll likely solve the matter.

Meaning, they'll fight somewhere else. But that's another topic.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Plenty of people on here have used disparate impact at as proof of discrimination, nothing more needed.

Blacks are losing after-school access to a Taco Bell, whites are not. Discrimination.

What evidence do you have that that Taco Bell does not serve white people?

You misunderstand.

I never said Taco Bell does not serve white people. I'm saying Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing after school.

So Taco Bells across the country are closing at 3:00pm if they are near mostly black schools? And the blackness of the school is the reason?

You just don't want to admit that this is an example of something non-discriminatory having a disparate impact.

have I said that closing the taco bell is discriminatory?

I am not the one here who is afraid to admit to something.

In other circumstances you have said that things that have a disparate impact are discrimination. I'm showing this has a disparate impact. Either this is discrimination or showing disparate impact isn't proof of discrimination.

- - - Updated - - -

Plenty of people on here have used disparate impact at as proof of discrimination, nothing more needed.

Really? Do you have a link or two?

You misunderstand.

I never said Taco Bell does not serve white people. I'm saying Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing after school.

If all of the Taco Bells are not closing, then clearly blacks are not losing after-school access to a Taco Bell unless you think Taco Bells near white schools do not serve blacks.

The blacks at that school are--it's very unlikely there are two Taco Bells close enough to the school.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Plenty of people on here have used disparate impact at as proof of discrimination, nothing more needed.

Blacks are losing after-school access to a Taco Bell, whites are not. Discrimination.

What evidence do you have that that Taco Bell does not serve white people?

You misunderstand.

I never said Taco Bell does not serve white people. I'm saying Taco Bells near mostly white schools aren't closing after school.

So Taco Bells across the country are closing at 3:00pm if they are near mostly black schools? And the blackness of the school is the reason?

You just don't want to admit that this is an example of something non-discriminatory having a disparate impact.

have I said that closing the taco bell is discriminatory?

I am not the one here who is afraid to admit to something.

In other circumstances you have said that things that have a disparate impact are discrimination.

in other circumstances meaning not this one! with different context and accompanying arguments and different facts of the case.

I'm showing this has a disparate impact. Either this is discrimination or showing disparate impact isn't proof of discrimination.

Are you suggesting that discrimination does not lead to disparate outcomes?

 

[laughing dog]

The blacks at that school are--it's very unlikely there are two Taco Bells close enough to the school.

I see. You have no idea and are literally assuming your conclusions.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

You misunderstand.

If all of the Taco Bells are not closing, then clearly blacks are not losing after-school access to a Taco Bell unless you think Taco Bells near white schools do not serve blacks.

The blacks at that school are--it's very unlikely there are two Taco Bells close enough to the school.

Apparently brawling inside a Taco Bell is a protected right?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The blacks at that school are--it's very unlikely there are two Taco Bells close enough to the school.

I see. You have no idea and are literally assuming your conclusions.

They're not going to put two so close together that they are drawing each other's customers.

- - - Updated - - -

You misunderstand.

The blacks at that school are--it's very unlikely there are two Taco Bells close enough to the school.

Apparently brawling inside a Taco Bell is a protected right?

Disparate impact has nothing to do with any of this.

 

[laughing dog]

I see. You have no idea and are literally assuming your conclusions.

They're not going to put two so close together that they are drawing each other's customers.

. If one Taco Bell is closed, customers can migrate to another one. Unless you are saying that the customers of the closed Taco Bell are unable to migrate or are denied service to other Taco Bells, your argument is irrelevant.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

You misunderstand.

The blacks at that school are--it's very unlikely there are two Taco Bells close enough to the school.

Apparently brawling inside a Taco Bell is a protected right?

Disparate impact has nothing to do with any of this.

Huh?

 

[Duke Leto]

And another OPer gets tossed into the Ignore List.

Good on ya.