You're intentionally trying to befog the situation with race to discuss tangents because you know you're wrong.
Which would lead a reasonable rational thinking person to conclude that she didn't call the cops merely because someone was "cooking at a BBQ", regardless of skin color.
Um... I'm the one trying to "defog" the situation with race. I'm specifically responding to folks who automatically assume that if the person who did something harmful was white, and the person who was the recipient of the harmful thing was not-white, that the harmful thing itself must have been motivated by racial bias.
Sorry. I find that assumption to be ridiculous. There's a massive gulf in between "assume it must be about race" and "assume it could not have been about race". Most of the cases are going to be in that range.
The major point is that the lady at the BBQ improperly called the police.
Absolutely. The problem is that the case was posted here specifically as a supporting argument for the Starbucks case being assumed to be driven by racial bias. That assumption is *not* supported by the facts though.
This is evident, (regardless of skin colors).
Sure. Except for the fact that no one would have known about the event happening, much less posted about it on this forum, if not for the skin colors of the people involved. Which is somewhat my point.
So, why is it hard to accept that the barista might have improperly called the cops as well?
It's not. It's entirely possible that she overreacted to the situation at hand. In fact, I've posted this as a possible explanation for the events in question already in this thread. The point isn't whether it was proper for her to have called the cops, but with the assumption that it was not only improper, but that the motivation on her part was driven by racial bias.
Why do you insist that the customers must have done something wrong when the people at the BBQ didn't do anything wrong either?
I have not insisted that the customers "must have done something wrong". I have presented that as a more likely possibility than that the barista is just an evil racist bigot who called the cops on two guys just for being black. Obviously, it's also possible that they did nothing wrong, but she called the cops anyway, but that her motivation was also not about race. As I mentioned earlier, she may have overreacted to the guy's request to use the restroom. Misunderstood something they said. Was having a bad day. Whatever.
My position on this has always been that in the long list of possible explanations for what happened "she's just a racist" is far far far down the list. Laughably so. Yet, that's the first one that everyone seems to leap to, and that has been repeated over and over in the media.
I'll also point out that the odds of a random person calling the cops by mistake on someone who was doing nothing wrong at all is vastly higher than the odds of an employee in a customer facing position doing the same. I've had the cops called on me by a nosy neighbor for "doing nothing wrong" before. I suspect most of us have at some point. It happens. People see you hanging out with your friends somewhere, don't recognize you as someone who lives in the neighborhood, and they call the cops. Because some people are just like that. There does not need to be any racial component to that action at all. Yet, if the person who got the cops called on them happens to be a PoC, in many cases, it is assumed to be racially driven.
I think that's a bad assumption to make. That's seriously all I'm trying to say here.