That is, unfortunately, not the way society as a whole sees it. It is fairly common for stores to be attacked as racist when they lock down products that are targeted at a specific minority segment; even when they have clear data indicating those products are stolen more than others. The intent and reason for actions is no longer the deciding factor in whether or not something is racist/biased; the effect is what's focused on.

As a side note, I am of the opinion that, if the effect causes real problems for the target segment, then focusing on it is reasonable. For example, if loans are harder to get for a minority because they are more likely to default, then (regardless of the intent/reason for making the loans harder) it makes sense to consider this bad and look for a solution. If it's something like a hair care product that is behind lock and key because it's stolen more often, then calling the store racist is a little over the top. I guess, in the end, it's a matter of balancing the interests of society against that of the store (or other party). There's a large gray area there.