Stop and think a little, while what you say is not untrue, it completely misses the target through the hurt. It's not being black which is wrong, it's the consequence of that which is. You've got to get past this black-and-white dichotomy if we're ever going to make headway, and that might require a short period of reverse discrimination to highlight the people who can't cope with it. I too (don't we all? if not, why not, you're losing out) have black friends in one of the most deprived areas of London, and we treat each other as people whose skin just happens to be of different colours.
Problems only come from those who see the skin as a short-cut identifier of a fundamental difference in culture in a negative way. It's the reaction which is wrong and has to be sorted, not saying it like it is allows them to get away with it. In that headline, it either suggests all cops are racist - and I hope not - or that the authority of the cop is such that the question cannot be addressed - which may be true, thanks to the idea that Grand Juries can be led by the nose in the States and the track record in the UK of malfeasance in public office in places like Oldham. If so, it's wrong, and that is the question under examination: in the UK the first hearing is almost always before a magistrate who's been around the block a few times, addressing the US question.
Emphasising the race rather than the discrimination just victimises further, and actualy plays the racists game for them. Criminals exist in all communities, at least potentially in the eyes of the Law which treats all equally, and to say "I can't be held to account because I'm black" is also in and of itself racist - and that may also be an element of the pproblem in Ferguson. Not the critical part, but a part none the less. To say "Your judgement, Mr Policeman, is wrong because you (among others, but we'll start with you because you're sheltering them) don't apply the Law equitably (in equal proportion to all)" is addressing the heart of the problem, and the question then becomes whether Mr Plod is capable of getting the balance right, after the training he's had, and if not how the hell he can be allowed to continue with the extra authority his post brings with it, as it turns the entire society racist to a degree.
In the UK, we've passed the point where we've asked the first question, asking the Police to correct their racist culture, in the 1999 Macpherson Report into the killing of Stephen Lawrence by a quasi-fascist gang operating under the shelter of the local police, which described the Police Force as a whole as institutionally racist. If they have not got it right fifteen years later, then next time there can be no mercy. We are currently asking the same question about widespread kowtowing at the very least to a bunch of paedophiles certainly highly-placed in certain communities and possibly in Parliament as well. That widens the question from "stop being racist" to "start doing your bloody jobs of applying the law equally". So fundamental is that challenge, though, that I think that if the evidence brings us to that position, then there may be cases for summary dismissals for gross misconduct, not least in public office.
But when things happen, they are reacted to. As I type, a deputy District Judge at Preston Magistrates Court has just steppped down after making some grossly disparagingly racist comments about an Asian witness. In this country (UK), we are becoming actively anti-racist not in a psotively-discriminatory way, but purely and simply by not accepting it in any shape or form. Indeed, we are becoming slightly anti-positive discrimination, because it has served its time: the need is to lift black communities which have suffered. It's not entirely there yet, though, Tottenham still has abusive landlords, but they are being exposed. The question is rather one of access to services - the queue for the support services at the local Council has to be seen to be believed. At least the distribution of public financing is weighted to address the question, discretionary money going to neighbourhoods proportionately to need.