Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Mugello, 2020

Hamilton says FIA will introduce new rules in response to Breonna Taylor T-shirt controversy

2020 Russian Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by and

Lewis Hamilton expects new rules will be introduced by the FIA this weekend in response to the T-shirt he wore on the podium at Mugello.

Following his victory in the Tuscan Grand Prix, Hamilton wore a T-shirt bearing the messages “arrest the cops who killed Breonna Taylor” and “say her name”. He also wore the shirt during the pre-race end racism observance and his post-race interview.

The FIA is sensitive to grands prix being used for political gestures. In 2006 the Turkish Grand Prix promoter was fined $5 million – a record at the time – when their podium presentation was deemed to have violated the sport’s political neutrality.

While Hamilton said he has not spoken to the FIA about the T-shirt, or whether its message was considered a political statement, he expects the rules will be changed this weekend to prevent anyone from doing the same.

“I haven’t spoken to them but I heard that tomorrow they’re coming out with a new ruling of some sort saying what we can and cannot do,” said Hamilton in today’s FIA press conference.

He indicated any change will not dissuade him from using his high-profile position to continue raising awareness of racism and supporting the Black Lives Matter movement.

“I don’t know what they’re going to do this weekend. But lots of rules have been written for me over the years, that hasn’t stopped me.

“What I will do is just continue to try to work with Formula 1 and with the FIA to make sure the messaging is right. Could it be better? Of course, it could always be better, but that’s part of the learning curve.”

Taylor was shot eight times and killed by police officers who entered her home in Kentucky in March. The case has been highlighted by worldwide anti-racism protests and the Black Lives Matter movement. Hamilton said the issue at stake is a matter of human rights and not politics, and he was encouraged by the response his gesture received among his supporters.

“What was really positive was the support that I’ve got from the fans,” he said. “I think the fans have been amazing.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

“I don’t regret a single moment of it. I usually follow my heart and do what I feel is right. I felt that that was me following my heart I did something that’s never really happened in Formula 1 and obviously they’ll stop it from happening moving forward.

“People do talk about sport not being a place for politics. Ultimately it’s a human rights issue and in my opinion that is something that we should be pushing towards.

“We have a huge group of amazing people that watch our sport from multiple different backgrounds and cultures and we should definitely be pushing positive messages towards them. Especially for equality.”

Hamilton added the FIA’s road safety agenda, which president Jean Todt is a prominent supporter of, is “also, you could say, almost human rights.”

He said he understands the FIA’s desire not to be seen as endorsing political messages. “As a business and as an organisation they’ve obviously got certain limits that they feel they have to work within. They’re obviously trying to make everyone happy which is obviously what they’ve tried to do, and do the right thing.

“So again I think this is a learning process for everyone because people have been happy with the norm here of how life and society has operated. But ultimately the world, and the younger generation particularly, are more conscious that things aren’t equal and change is needed.

“So it does take conversations with people and things like Mugello happening for people to spark the conversation that perhaps would never have taken place if it didn’t happen.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2020 Russian Grand Prix

Browse all 2020 Russian Grand Prix articles

Author information

Dieter Rencken
Dieter Rencken has held full FIA Formula 1 media accreditation since 2000, during which period he has reported from over 300 grands prix, plus...
Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

102 comments on “Hamilton says FIA will introduce new rules in response to Breonna Taylor T-shirt controversy”

  1. So happy to see the FIA is laser-focused on SWAT raids in Louisville, KY.

    1. I don’t really understand Hamilton’s obsession with police shooting in the USA. What does it have to do with the rest of the world????

      1. The FIA better not deflect to Hamilton on this matter.
        First off, BLM has quietly put their tail between their legs and removed one of their key goals – the breakup of the nuclear family. For those who remember, MAG listed that as the reason he refused to join the kneelers.
        Evidently European athletes have done their homework and are distancing themselves from BLM unlike US sports such as the NBA and NFL which are putting up with it for financial gains.
        The Taylor case involved a long and thorough investigation. The cops knocked, which the media failed to divulge up until the last minute, and were shot at first. Breonna was innocent – it was tragic but she happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. One of the cops was prosecuted for randomly firing his weapon and was fired but the others did nothing deserving prosecution.
        Hamilton is making a mockery of the F1 – they need to be firm with him instead of kowtowing to his demands. The divisiveness he and other athletes such as LeBron James out of ignorance is setting a dangerous precedent.
        Hamilton is entitled to his opinion and does through on social media but should be restrained from doing so on race weekends.

        1. i agree its pointless for Hamilton to do these stunts of anti racism on race weekends.He can do it away from the sport itself..Let him concentrate on being the GOAT by winning races and he can switch activism once he retires.

        2. Excellent summation, Hamilton is a low-information protester and as a 14 year supporter it pains me to watch this stuff each and every race weekend.

        3. Why do you think the boyfriend dialled 911?

          The point of the protest is that the ‘long and thorough investigation’ wasn’t done impartially or properly, so you have it very much back to front. Nothing happened at all, for months, until the protest got going.

        4. Jan, so you are claiming that the officers knocked when they deliberately chose to use a no-knock warrant that meant that meant there was no obligation to knock on the door of the property? The only evidence that anybody knocked on the door comes from the police officers themselves, whereas all of the independent witnesses have provided witness testimony that claims no attempt was made by the officers to knock on the door.

          It has in fact been pointed out that the official form that the policemen filled out afterwards with their version of events is riddled with errors throughout the document, such that their testimony is decidedly dubious or appears to be an outright fabrication. To pick a few examples, those same officers also claimed in the same form that they had not broken down the door – even though they had – and also claimed that Breonna Taylor had no injuries at all, both of which are utterly and transparently false claims.

          At the very least, the official report from those involved quite clearly shows that the other officers involved were submitting information that was highly inaccurate or downright fake in their reports back to their senior officers. Do you think that it is acceptable for those officers to have submitted clearly inaccurate information about the use of lethal force during such a raid?

          1. I refer you to the New York Times thorough, months long investigation involving pouring over 1,000 documents for starters. By the way, the NYT are anything but pro police.
            They came to the same conclusion as the recent findings – not enough evidence to convict all but one officers.
            There may have been mistakes made and contradictory testimonies – these operations are extremely tense to start with and to remember each detail is unrealistic.
            The bottom line is an investigation took that many months and was under the scrutiny of the country if not most of the world. A decision was made – time to move on.

        5. You are very misinformed, but I will only mention one point as someone else (anon) has covered the rest; no cop has yet been prosecuted. One cop, the one who blindly fired 10 shots into the apartment, has finally just this week been charged, but only with putting other residents at risk because he fired from outside the residence. I don’t see how the boyfriend can be blamed for firing (just one shot) when in the middle of the night his door is smashed open with no indication that it was the police. Americans are encouraged to be gun owners and to use their gun if someone breaks into their home. That is all he did.
          Well done Lewis for drawing more attention to this tragic case.

  2. Barry Bens (@barryfromdownunder)
    24th September 2020, 16:05

    Ah yes, good old Lewis with his God complex. “They write rules but I don’t follow them”. Rules are meant to be followed and it is quite ironic that it’s exactly that part in real life that he is (unjustified) trying to defend. If one obeys the rules, there is no reason to be worried about anything.

    1. @barryfromdownunder Your reading comprehension is appalling. He said the rules haven’t stopped him – not that he hasn’t followed then.

      What a surprise – yet again someone is making stuff up about Hamilton to be able to have a go at him.

  3. Lewis is getting really good with words too. Nice to see how he is able to avoid having to critisize the FIA for trying to stop him doing this in the futre in his answer, well done.

    1. @bascb Very diplomatic – seems like he’s carefully balancing making maximum use out of his platform, without eroding it.

    2. Saying he will navigate around the FIA’s intentions behind a new rule and get his message across regardless. Sounds pretty arrogant and disrespectful to me.
      Lewis is very good at many things, diplomatic speaking is not one of them. It’s entertaining watching him try though.

      1. Honestly hilarious how you can view that as “arrogant and disrespectful”.

        1. I can see that, I imagine you as frosty the snowflake, chuckling to himself while wearing a tinfoil hat!

    3. @bascb His message is also switching the focus away unhappy Mercedes sponsors present on the driver overall and that want to be seen during the podium ceremony… Haven’t seen a single article on that topic but wouldn’t be surprised if they had some internal talks on that matter.

      Good on Lewis for the wording

      1. Good point about that too @jeanrien

  4. No t-shirt stating his disgust at the multiple black on black murders that are rampant throughout the US? Crimes within black communities that utterly dwarf these sporadic police killings.

    1. people should read the police report, if anyone is to blame for breonna it is her boyfriend.

      1. No, the death of Breonna Taylor is a direct result of the abuse of no-knock warrants in the USA. At least 5 people have lost their lives as a result of gunfire during no-knock warrants being served in the past two years– Breonna Taylor, however, was the only black victim. Ironically, no-knock warrants seem to be some of the least racially biased actions by the police.

        Her boyfriend thought his house was being invaded by criminals.

        The police thought they were being shot at by a drug dealer.

        And that’s why the most serious charge is reckless endangerment– it was a tragedy, and nothing will bring Ms. Taylor back– but it doesn’t meet the standard for murder, no matter how many people protest.

        1. Ok, stop right there. You spilled out too many facts.

        2. It was not a “no knock warrant”. Have you even read the police report?
          It was a warrant with her name and address on it (she was involved in cross state drug dealing with her boy friend), they knocked and declared who they were and what they wanted them to do, he BF shot at the cops and the cops shot back.

          The person to blame for her death is her dead, drug dealer boyfriend.

        3. They had a no-knock warrant, but they didn’t use it… The knocked on the door and identified themselves, the boyfriend says he only heard the knock.. other witness said heard the knock and the identifying.

        4. Pretty well sums it up.

          For anyone who isn’t aware, the US drug laws historically had a racial bias, where drugs crime in the black community had stricter laws and greater prosecution.

      2. @abananasplitz –

        people should read the police report, if anyone is to blame for breonna it is her boyfriend.

        You obviously haven’t read it. Obviously.

        1. Have you? Read it and then get back to us.

      3. Read the police report?! The piece of fantasy where they make claims like the police knocked and announced themselves, yet all the neighbours say that didn’t happen. They say the apartment door wasn’t damaged, the evidence of the door says different. And perhaps the most outrageous claim of all, Breonna was uninjured?! You think THAT piece of fiction proves anything other than the police tried to do a lot of covering up?

    2. Maybe that’s because years of systemic racism isnt the cause of these black-on-black killings which is what Lewis is fighting.

      1. “systemic”…. bc yes all white people have a secret agreement in place all across the world jsut to opress the black man….

        1. Its almost like your mental gymnastics are forgetting that less then a lifetime ago black people couldn’t even use the same bathroom as white people. That type of racism doesn’t just go away

          1. Its 2020 Carlos, it was and is terrible how some blacks are treated, but it’s horrible how some whites asians hispanics you name it are treated. The way forward is for everyone to have respect for one another, not to burn and vandalize cities and further divide us.

    3. No t-shirt stating his disgust at the multiple black on black murders

      He might plan to wear that the week after wears one with the definition of ‘whataboutism’.

      1. @coldfly

        It’s “black lives matter,” right?

        Not, ‘black lives matter, but only when white people kill black people.’

        Or is that the secret real meaning behind the slogan?

        1. Welcome back @Karen; I thought you were still asleep*

          * not sure if your opposition to being ‘woke’ is your preference to being ‘slept’ or more generally you prefer to remain ignorant, a bit like ‘monkey see, monkey do’

          1. @coldfly

            My opposition is because the woke ideology is a racist conspiracy theory. Ironically, ‘woke’ people are typically the ignorant ones, believing things that go against the scientific evidence, but not against the cherry-picked narratives that are used to deceive them. Of course, you can ‘prove’ anything by cherry picking evidence.

            You should try replacing ‘white’ with ‘Jewish’ and ‘black’ with ‘Aryan’ in woke claims. The end result is typically hardcore racist/antisemitic statements. For example: Aryan lives matter.

            You’ve been indoctrinated into considering woke racism to be perfectly reasonable, in the same way that very many Germans in the ’30s and ’40’s considered it perfectly reasonable to believe in antisemitic conspiracy theories. I’m trying to get people to apply generic moral standards, rather than rationalizations.

          2. @coldfly

            An example of how ignorant a lot of woke people are is that some of the statues that were attacked were honoring black people or white people known for helping the black cause.

            For instance, BLM protestors defaced the Shaw Memorial, a monument honoring the first all-volunteer black regiment of the Union Army in the Civil War and their commander, including the first black Medal of Honor winner. Note that these men didn’t merely risk death, but, if captured, risked slavery.

            Shaw, the white commander who supported equal treatment of black troops and encouraged them to refuse to accept lesser pay than white soldiers, died while commanding his men. The Confederate army refused to bury him with honors befitting his rank, instead burying him in a mass grave, among his black soldiers. This was intended as a sign of disrespect, but Shaw’s friends and family believed it was an honor for him to be buried with his soldiers. His father wrote: “We would not have his body removed from where it lies surrounded by his brave and devoted soldiers. … We can imagine no holier place than that in which he lies, among his brave and devoted followers, nor wish for him better company. – what a body-guard he has!”

            As we’ve seen on images, a whole lot of protestors are white people. So you probably had white people defacing a monument honoring black men who fought against slavery and a white commander who did more for black emancipation than any of these rioters ever will.

            The sad part is that I can’t even blame these woke fools too much, because of the false narrative that they are constantly being told, by people who should know better. They probably can’t even imagine that any memorial can exist that honors black people or anti-slavery, because they are constantly being told that America is a deeply racist nation that refuses to honor black people, refuses to reckon with slavery, etc, etc.

  5. How about a new rule about cops not shooting Breana Taylor anymore. This is frickin F1 not American politics

    1. There is a rule. When police are executing a legal search warrant, and they knock on the door, announce they are police and are there to execute a search warrant and no one answers? When the police legally enter the home and find a man with a gun pointed at them and that man begins shooting at the officers, the police return fire.

      What we have in the US is a terrible problem of people of all races resisting lawful arrest with deadly force. A rule we already have on the books. We also have a number of instances of police acting illegally and badly – against people of all backgrounds. And when you take those number of instances and note that there are 340 million people in the US, you see the number, while tragic, is a small number compared to the alternative of no police.

      The bottom line is: her death was terrible tragedy caused by people resisting lawful police actions with deadly force.

  6. Maybe a better move would be to stay silent on political matters, especially in areas where Mr. Hamilton has no factual knowledge. As more information comes out regarding this and other events, it will show that the initial Narrative being propagated was a lie. This won’t stop high-profile celebrities from chiming in of course, but repeating a lie does not help anybody. What’s happening now is animosity and tensions are being escalated for domestic American political reasons. Using F1 as a platform to inflame this situation is irresponsible and should be punished by the FIA.

  7. i think that T-shirt certainly got people talking but not in the way Hamilton thinks, possibly quite the opposite in fact.

    1. Because he lied and said he didn’t know it was the police, what do expect from a criminal.

  8. Not sure touting it as a human rights issue will get any traction with the FIA. Many countries that F1 visits have regimes with pretty dubious human rights records. Lest of all Russia, who so happen to be hosting this week’s race. Comments on Alexei Navalny anyone?!

    As I said a few weeks ago I’d be happy for the FIA to ban messages on the podium. I don’t want a circus of human rights issues each week (despite whatever I think of the issues themselves).

    1. If F1 or FIA were bothered by human rights, 1/3 of the calendar would instantly disappear..

      And a few more are open for discussion.

    2. Absolutely. Especially considering the grand jury ruling yesterday on the Taylor case, there are much worse things going on in other countries on the F1 calendar and the rumored Saudi race.

    3. Quite right, the podium is not a ‘platform’ for any driver’s pet projects.

  9. things like Mugello happening for people to spark the conversation that perhaps would never have taken place if it didn’t happen

    True. It makes people do their research and realized that Breonna Taylor case was not about racism.

    1. Do you think @ruliemaulana they’d have left a 26-year-old white woman with 5 bullets in her unattended? I mean, ignored, while they did other stuff, for at least 5 minutes? She’s down on the ground, in the corridor they’d just sprayed with gunfire, and they don’t go to her. The police report even listed her injuries as “none”. They didn’t even call an ambulance for her.

      1. I don’t think they care @zann. They’re trained to be ruthless. Especially during a raid like this. Even the chokehold on Floyd was on their training manual too.

        This whole police brutality is expected on a country that let everyone to own a gun.

        1. Well I don’t know @ruliemaulana, I do think if they shot a white woman they’d at least attend to her.

      2. Your making a lot of assumptions here. Their actions would seem to indicate the police initially didn’t know she was injured. If it was a racially motivated shooting why is her boyfriend Kenneth Walker – who shot an officer – still alive?

        1. Nobody’s saying it was racially motivated, Dane. They cared less, because she was brown and so ‘not like themselves’. Her boyfriend they missed because they were firing wildly, he presumably ducked and they weren’t specifically trying to murder him.

          But she was down on the floor, in the corridor they’d just fired 22 bullets into, are you saying it’d be normal for them not to go and take a look at her? It was her boyfriend who had to dial 911.

          1. You are saying it was racially motivated because your accusing them of not helping her – completely without evidence I might add – based on her race. For some reason that’s always the first assumption anytime there’s any interracial violence, as if there’s no other possible factors. The more likely scenario if they had noticed her and didn’t care, is because they assumed she was a criminal. We know now from the grand jury that Taylor was named on the warrant they were serving and had just been shot at by someone in the house. I’m not saying it was right to leave her unattended, but let’s stop pretending that every police interaction is racist all the time.

          2. @zann

            That very same boyfriend had initiated the firefight by shooting a police officer. I think it’s pretty logical for the police to first withdraw to a safer spot and tend to the cop that was shot, rather than storm in again, potentially into a hail of bullets.

          3. The incident was initiated by the cops @aapje, Dane, who did the raid in the middle of the night, didn’t clearly identify themselves, weren’t wearing body cameras, and when the door wasn’t opened didn’t try to have a dialogue they broke it down. The fact the boyfriend dialled 911 shows he didn’t realise it was the cops doesn’t it.

            They had 5 minutes with an open door to start talking to whoever was inside, after firing 22 bullets into the hallway. In fact it was 20 minutes I think before paramedics arrived and just went in.

            So they generally did not care, and then what followed was a cover-up by them and their institution. So Say Her Name got started because of the cover-up. And as an individual instance yes anyone can take refuge in the “can’t prove it” argument but it’s one of a pattern, of cops being indifferent towards black people’s feelings, using a double standard, behaving with less care and respect.

            And now here we are with F1 giving it a platform, and the fact that a couple of minutes’ exposure, by a brown person, has made it such an emotive issue tells us everything about why the exposure really is needed.

            And actually a lot of the fuss is about Lewis having so much status that he can do it. Same as both Brundle and Hamilton said Red Bull are suffering tactically with Alex, but only Lewis’ words get spun into a criticism of him. Double standard, for the 100th time. It’s all about status.

          4. @zann

            The cops didn’t start shooting, though. Isn’t the very complaint against the police that they shoot too soon? Why does Breonna’s boyfriend get a pass on this, aside from anti-police hatred, where you don’t care about police lives?

            I don’t think it is weird for the police to take 5 minutes to assess the situation after a police officer got shot.

            Now, I’m not defending all the police procedures here, but you were going beyond criticizing police procedure and alleged racism on the part of the police, without any apparent evidence. Most of your criticism are of police actions that happened when they probably weren’t even aware that Breonna was in the apartment (who was not a permanent resident, but was sleeping over).

          5. Where are you seeing it wasn’t her apartment @aapje? All the sources I’ve seen say it was hers.

          6. @zann

            Yes, you are correct. That was my mistake. It was indeed her apartment.

            Note that the police officer was shot in the femoral artery, which presumably requires rapid aid, so it seems logical that the police officer present were initially focused on getting to safety and caring for their injured colleague.

            The Grand Jury investigation found that the officers that actually shot Breonna were justified in fearing for their lives and that they cannot be blamed for her death, since she was so close to the person shooting at them. The one officer that was charged for reckless endangerment didn’t hit anyone.

            You still haven’t given evidence of racism, as you alleged. Your allegation of a cover-up is, if it is true, not evidence of racism unless you can show that cops won’t protect their own if the victim is white.

  10. Genuine question, what other rules is Lewis referring to when he says: ‘But lots of rules have been written for me over the years, that hasn’t stopped me.’?

    I haven’t followed F1 closely enough for long enough to be able to think of anything that he could be referring to.

    1. All in his imagination my friend.
      Listen to him on the radio, he has a major persecution complex. Goes all the way back to 2007 (and probably beyond) Button talks about it from a teammate perspective in his book too.

      1. I’m sure we all know someone like that. They’re adamant that the world is against them and they have to fight against everyone else when in reality it’s all in their imagination. It’s sad to see so many pandering to Lewis when it’s all nonsense.

    2. @chimaera2003 He has had some issue with helmet rules where they stopped allowing drivers to change the look which specifically impacted Hamilton (but also others) who liked to have specific helmets for several events per season.

      Or maybe he also means the sporting rules (or application of them). For instance the change to overtaking rules made up by the Ferrari consultant/steward after the 2008 Spa race. Also the rule about “weaving” on the straight when Hamilton was simply trying to break the tow he was giving Petrov.

      If you add technical rule changes trying to hold him back (and/or his team) the list goes a lot longer.

      1. Spa 2008 was one wasn’t it @f1osaurus, the special new rule saying wait 2 corners after rejoining. 2012 suddenly McLaren weren’t allowed to use the tolerance that was written in the rules for the floor. In 2011 doing a perfect spin turn on the spot was magically ‘forcing another driver off the track’. In France Heikki impeded Heidfeld, Lewis got the penalty, in Fuji Heikki hit Kimi at T1 but yay Lewis got done for forcing him off the track.

        And it’s not quite the same but let’s see if Michael Masi is feeling quite so offended by the other drivers criticising the SC lights staying on so late in Mugello.

        1. @zann Yeah true there were a lot of weird rule interpretations, especially in 2008. But then that’s what you get when you appoint a Ferrari consultant as the sole steward.

        2. ”In 2011 doing a perfect spin turn on the spot was magically ‘forcing another driver off the track’. ”

          The so-called perfect spin turn on the spot was in the middle of the road with cars approaching…. just sayin

      2. @f10clown
        If you add technical rule changes trying to hold him back (and/or his team) the list goes a lot longer.

        Yeah, I remember his blown diffuser being taken away
        Yeah, I remember his active suspension being taken away
        Yeah, I remember his traction control being taken away
        Yeah, I remember his mass damper being taken away
        Yeah, I remember his fan being taken away
        Yeah, I remember………

        Oh, but Lewis his party-mode being taken away is all of a sudden a problem and proof that th erules are written aginst him?

        And next to that: No specific rule, and especially the helmet rule (which was aimed at Vettel) has ever been written for the king of hypocrisy.

        1. Dry your tears buddy

  11. Maybe he could donate 30 or 40 million to the United Negro College Fund.

    1. Sorry he donates the largest part of his charitable giving to disadvantaged children. He could stop the support for disabled vets, carers, homeless, etc though if you ask nicely.
      I could also give you the address of the childrens cancer hospice he supports. You could write and demand they accept no more help from him?

  12. The FIA is sensitive to grands prix being used for political gestures.

    Hmm, so no Saudi Arabian GP then? Good news.

  13. I pay to watch drivers do F1. I don’t pay to be lectured by drivers on world events. I’d follow drivers on Insta. etc if I wanted more from them.

    1. I don’t pay anymore. Cancelled Sky and watch highlights on channel 4 instead.
      Freed up some time as well as money now that I’m not paying to listen to hours propaganda!

    2. Well I hope you dont watch Sky then

  14. The trouble is there are too many problems in the world that demand attention and action. Raising Tibetan flag ceremony before every race or calls for Palestinian independence would certainly raise some eyebrows, and it would be fascinating to see Hamilton or any other driver lead the rest to observe such gestures with fervor. It will never happen, of course…but why? Certainly they are equally worthy human rights causes as lot of people are suffering and dying there.

  15. Lmao, fire up the comment section engagement!

  16. F1 like every other sport is no place for politics.

  17. Nobody’s saying it was racially motivated, Dane. They cared less, because she was brown and so ‘not like themselves’. Her boyfriend they missed because they were firing wildly, he presumably ducked and they weren’t specifically trying to murder him.

    But she was down on the floor, in the corridor they’d just fired 22 bullets into, are you saying it’d be normal for them not to go and take a look at her? It was her boyfriend who had to dial 911.

    1. @zann

      They cared less, because she was brown and so ‘not like themselves’.

      Any evidence for this, or is this just typical progressive bias?

      1. Oooh I always wanted to be progressive @aapje :)

        It’s just how it works tho. Everyone has in-groups and out-groups, and you empathise more with people who are in your in-group. So when people behave with an obvious lack of empathy towards someone, that’s evidence they’re in an out-group, and it’s a sliding scale obviously. So then, over time evidence can build up that right at the end of the scale is a certain out-group consistently identified by race. Voila: racism. And when it’s consistently among people who belong to one institution, that’s institutional racism.

        It’s a cultural thing of course, so it can be changed, and that’s what F1 has become a part of, thanks to you know who.

        1. @zann

          That makes sense, if there wasn’t scientific evidence that shows that the police shoots more often in more violent communities, but that black people in those communities don’t get shot more often. In other words, they also shoot white people in violent communities far more often, so racism against blacks can’t explain this pattern.

          Black police officers also shoot black people more often than white police officers, although this is because black police officers work in black communities more often. Compensated for that, they shoot black people equally often.

          So are you going to claim that black cops have black citizens as their outgroup and that the reason for this is racism? Do you think that these cops have a mental illness where they think they are white?

          Of course, you can turn this into a postmodern discussion where truth doesn’t exist and it’s all about subjective perceptions, but then you leave the realm of science and fact, preferring bias and the beliefs of your bubble.

          In general, the ‘woke’ ideology is disproven by a bunch of hard facts. For example, the allegation that Western society is first and foremost biased in favor of whites and against people of color, ignores that white American are less successful than Asian Americans. The latter also get shot less by the police than white people. This would not be possible if America was racist in the ways claimed by woke people.

          This is ultimately why wokesters like Lewis cannot but fail. Their beliefs are factually incorrect and they, like Don Quixote, tilt at windmills, rather than actually address the causes. Their activism (and the ‘reporting’ by the media) consists largely of spreading misinformation.

        2. Let’s have a link to your evidence @aapje. Or should I call you Donald? :) Cos Donald said more white people get shot by police, then it turns out that:

          Victims were majority white (52%) but disproportionately black (32%) with a fatality rate 2.8 times higher among blacks than whites.


        3. @zann

          Your study doesn’t disprove my claim, because black Americans are more often criminals, so they do get shot ‘disproportionately’ more often than their share of the population, but not disproportionately more often compared to their crime rates. This is not evidence for biased policing, unless you think it strange that the police would more often shoot criminals than non-criminals.

          For the latest study, which is consistent with earlier studies, google “Officer characteristics and racial disparities in fatal officer-involved shootings.”

          My comment was blocked for adding the link.

          It found that:

          We find no evidence of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparities across shootings, and White officers are not more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-White officers. Instead, race-specific crime strongly predicts civilian race.

          In other words, black people are shot more often because black crime rates are higher. In places where black people live with low crime rates, fewer black people get shot and in places where white people live with higher crime rates, more white people get shot.

          Note that the study is retracted, not for being factually wrong in any way, but because the authors disagree with how their findings are interpreted by others, which is an absurd reason to retract a study and which shows how woke politics is now destroying academia.

          Of course, one can try to hide the facts from people, but reality doesn’t care that you deny it. When studies show no evidence of racism in police shootings, but rather than the disparity is due to high black criminality, the police can’t fix this disparity, as they cannot magically make black people less prone to criminal behavior. So then you can ‘abolish the police,’ but then armed gangs will run the place, like in CHAZ/CHOP where the murder rate was extremely high and the security force had a higher shooting rate than any police agency in the US.

          1. That’s a pretty good link @appje but the study didn’t say what you thought it said. They withdrew it because it had a mistake that led people to your mistaken conclusion:

            Despite this correction, our work has continued to be cited as providing support for the idea that there are no racial biases in fatal shootings, or policing in general. To be clear, our work does not speak to these issues and should not be used to support such statements. We take full responsibility for not being careful enough with the inferences made in our original report, as this directly led to the misunderstanding of our research.

            While our data and statistical approach were appropriate for investigating whether officer characteristics are related to the race of civilians fatally shot by police, they are inadequate to address racial disparities in the probability of being shot.

            Given these issues and the continued use of our work in the public debate on this topic, we have decided to retract the article.”


          2. @zann

            The retraction statement is a lie. If the actual issue was that their inferences were too strong, they could have simply issued an correction, as they did earlier. The real issue is that lots of people got angry at them because their findings don’t support progressive dogma, by not finding that white cops are more prone to shoot black people, while also finding that cops are only more likely to shoot black people if those black people are from a more criminal community.

            The woke ideology claims that white people are very racist against black people and that this causes police shootings, yet this is completely inconsistent with the finding of the paper that black cops are no less likely to shoot black people. The ideology also claims that cops shoot people purely for being black and are not responding to community violence or the fact that black people tend to commit violent crime more often, yet the paper’s findings are not consistent with this either.

            As the paper cannot be made to match woke beliefs without misrepresenting the findings, the researchers could not ‘fix’ their paper to be both scientifically correct, while also assuaging the woke mob. So they retracted their paper over how other people interpreted it, which is an absurd reason to retract a paper.

            Their statement that their paper didn’t disprove this form of police discrimination is merely technically correct in the sense that no scientific study can ever prove anything with 100% certainty. Strictly speaking, science can’t even prove that the Sun exists.

            Yet this level of pedantry is somehow only applied to papers with politically unpalatable results, not to papers with acceptable outcomes.

            PS. As I said, this is merely one of several papers with similar findings. The NYT reports on another such paper here: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html

          3. lol no @aapje the paper was about how likely different races of police were to shoot different races of people. Some redneck tribalists seized on this to pretend it showed police don’t shoot blacks more readily than whites. The authors couldn’t shut this down so they withdrew the paper.

            Your NYT article shows a very iffy methodology, with the authors admitting the data weren’t ideal, asking cops in a few cities to write out the data! When it was so obvious what the researchers were gonna do with it. And with more reliable data it shows that police are much more likely to stop, manhandle and physically bully blacks than whites.

            So at this point it’s still goshdurned pergresserive libruls 1 : tribal unwoke rednecks 0 :)

  18. So after the Grand Jury verdict it turns out that it was NOT a no knock warrant – the cops declared their presence and intentions, he name was on the warrant, Taylor and her boyfriend were involved in a cross state drug dealing operation and that her boyfriend opened fire on the police first.
    She was killed in the cross fire and it is nobody’s fault but her boyfriend who thought that a shootout with a dozen police officers was a good idea.

    And Hamiliton is defending her?

    He is just making a fool out of himself by hopping onto this band waggon. This time next year, everyone will have forgotten about the race baiting mania that has consumed the western world this year but people’s opinion of those who supported it will be changed for a lot longer.

    I used to support Hamilton, i remember feeling emotional when his winning streak began and i used to get up early or stay up late to watch him race. Now i just think he’s a moron. It’s very disapointing.

    1. There is no hard evidence that Taylor and her boyfriend were drug dealers. They merely had a friend who was a drug dealer and the warrant was given because the police and the judge thought that they might be involved.

  19. I am sorry say her name woman died.

    Her boyfriend did fire at the police.

    We all know US police likes to fire multiple rounds when threatened. One cop was hit aswell, firefight ensued, lucky only one person died. It could have been worse.

    I have a problem with police killing innocent people with cellphone in hand. But people who shoot at police?

  20. Simple do as your told like everybody else or forfeit your races points if any…..won’t take long for him to give up his god complex

  21. I don’t consider his t-shirt political in any way. It’s a social justice aproblem that’s being politicized by racists.

    1. @Gabe – The problem is that he only speaks up when the victim is Black, thats why people are seeing it as racist. They are not being racist, they are just responding to what they see as Lewis being racist (And that view has merit in the context of his behavior)

  22. Lets take is a step further “NoRoomForDescrimination”

  23. Surprised you run these Keith. The disgusting comments by the people on here are an embarrassment to me as a fan, to you as a website owner and to the sport of F1. Same people who complain to Ofcom (1900 complaints)that someone wears a BLM necklace on TV. Namely white privileged finger waggers who don’t know what the fuss is about. Never been stopped for no reason, never not been served, never not got the job, never dealt with multiple micro aggressions and worse, overt racism. A black barrister yesterday was stopped 3 times in court and told defendants have to wait for the usher. Until something like that happens to you, I suggest you stop with the sneering at Hamilton because he doesn’t follow some arbitrary code you cook up. Absolutely appalling.

    1. Thank you Tony. As a black, a lot of these comments really, really hurt. So much that I’ve cut down on my visits to the site. It is that bad.

  24. The answer is a 15 place grid penalty for that sort of politicing even hamilton wont risk that or a one race ban

  25. Sport shouldn’t be made into anyone’s little political statement, either way. It’s just sport. Meant for entertainment. People get enough of this everywhere else.

  26. “Breonna Taylor rented a car in 2016 that was used by her then-boyfriend Jamarcus Glover. In December 2016, Fernandez Bowman was found dead in the car.

    Taylor, 26, was shot dead inside of her home by Louisville Metro Police Department officers Jonathan Mattingly, Brett Hankison and Myles Cosgrave, on March 13, 2020, while they executed a search warrant. In September 2020, a grand jury failed to indict the three officers for their roles in Taylor’s death.

    Baggies of Heroin, Marijuana, Meth & Pills Were Also Found in the Rental Car.”

    Normal activities. I’ve had several dead bodies turn up in cars I’ve rented for my drug dealing friends

  27. I am really glad to be back watching F1 after a few years, thanks to Corona.
    Very proud that finally someone inside the sport seems to live in the same world that I live, It’s refreshing!

    I was never a huge Hamilton fan, in the past I used to cheer for my fellow brazilian countrymen, and in the last decade I was more inclined to Vettel, Kimi, Ricciardo and a few others. In the last few years (since I stopped watching) both Vettel and Hamilton seem to have matured and become more interesting people. It’s great to see them talking about pressing issues, inherent or not to the sport (Vettel in a lesser extent, as he’s not much in the limelight as he used to be).

    Even if I’m not a LH fan, it’s impossible not to admire his talent on the track. And now, his attitudes outside of it. In the early 2000’s I made the mistake of hating Schumacher, for his years of dominance. Not again. Now I enjoy the privilege of watching a great pilot in action.

Comments are closed.