It can be said that Donald Trump
deserves his share of the blame in the current crisis concerning the
interactions of police and black citizens—who as the media has failed to point
out constitute less than a third of all those killed by police in this country—and
his “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” tweet should have been seen
by police across the country as making things more difficult for them, for it only
put them in a more difficult moral and ethical position; any action they may
take is seen through a prism that “justifies” their abuse of power at the other
end. As others have pointed as well, Trump has made it clear he is not the
president of all—or even half—of the citizens of this country, and particularly
on a racial level, which only exacerbates societal tensions.
But so too does the media and
so-called “community leaders” deserve scrutiny about how they have used their
influence to excuse or overlook mindless destruction and criminal behavior. Over the weekend in Atlanta, police were
called to a Wendy’s fast food restaurant because a black man, Rayshard Brooks, was
“sleeping” in his car that was parked right in the drive-through lane, forcing
other customers to drive around his car. Why was he parked there, knowing that
he was inconveniencing others? He may or may not have been “impaired” by drugs
or alcohol, but he certainly was in sufficient possession of his faculties when
the police showed up. Was he trying to make a “political” point that was lost
on others?
Stop screwing around and tell
people what they can clearly see: the video shows Brooks was in the process of
being handcuffed by two police officers who were not acting with any undue force when Brooks began violently shaking
them off and starting throwing haymakers at the officers, who despite
“outnumbering” him were clearly not in control of the situation. One of the
officers used a Taser on Brooks’ leg, but that apparently had no effect, since
Brooks wrestled that Taser out of the officer’s hand and started running off.
Now we can certainly debate the actions the police took afterward, but the
simple, unalterable fact is that it was Brooks’ actions that triggered what would
should have been, if he had “cooperated,” been a simple arrest.
Are we now reaching the point in
some communities—particularly those with high crime rates—that lawless behavior
and physically obstructing police in the performance of their duties is the acceptable
norm? The large majority of people in even high crime areas obviously wish to
avoid making things worse in their communities, and we know that the reason why
Camden, NJ—once the country’s murder capital—disbanded its police force and
hired the county for its policing was because it was the only way it could
afford to put more police on its
streets, not less. And yet it is someone like Brooks, who does not deserve
undue sympathy because of his own actions that led to his death, who suddenly
become “martyrs” to the “cause.” And that “cause” includes setting fire to the
Wendy’s, the point of which I am certain is completely lost on more people than
me.
According to the website killedbypolice.net,
on the day George Floyd died, May 25, five other people were killed at the
hands of police; only one was identified as black. 53 people have been killed
by police since then. Of those identified by race and “ethnicity,” 13 were
white, 11 black, 6 Hispanic and 2 Asian or “other”—although I noted that one
identified as “white” and another as “black” had Spanish names. One person
whose race and “ethnicity” was not provided but was clearly Hispanic by his
photo was Sean Monterrosa, whose killing did not make it into the U.S. national
news stream but was reported in the UK’s The
Guardian. That publication reported that the unarmed Monterrosa was gunned
down by Vallejo, CA police who were responding to an alleged looting call outside
a Walgreens. According to the Guardian,
“When confronted by the police, he
dropped to his knees and surrendered, and they fired at him,” said Melissa
Nold, a Vallejo civil rights attorney representing Monterrosa’s family. “He
wasn’t doing anything to warrant it. They shot him from inside their car. What
opportunity did they give him to survive that situation? … It’s egregiously
bad.” The story included a photo with a sign stating that “black and brown lives matter” at the spot
Monterrosa was killed. Stories like this need to brought up not just because it
shows that it is not just black lives that are in danger from rogue cops, but
that some cases, such as this one, are more egregious in nature and context,
and unlike the other cases that were followed by scenes of destructive outrage,
police acted before there was any evidence of a crime being committed by the
victim, and no mayhem followed after it.
One “community leader” claimed
the Atlanta incident had to be about “the culture.” Obviously this was in
reference to the police, but we shouldn’t let the “culture” behind lawless
behavior by “civilians” to escape scrutiny either. When I ride the local buses
I see where this starts, when people who ignore rider rules of behavior are
“enabled” by either drivers who don’t enforce the rules, or by those who think
that such complaints are have a “racial” motivation and can be ignored for that
reason. I once had a “discussion” with an black woman who told me it wasn’t any
of my business that a black male was blaring his “music” from his cell phone
speaker, disregarding the rule mandating the use of headphones that was plainly
spelled out in the “Ride Right” posting; to each of her “justifications” I
merely asked her “What is the rule?” before she simply shut down because she
didn’t want to admit that yes, he was ignoring the bus rules.
That may be a little, minor
thing, but these things have to start somewhere. In Seattle’s Capitol Hill
district there is an establishment called “Gay City,” billed “Seattle’s LGBTQ
Center.” Its front is almost entirely glass, and yet unlike other establishments
in area the proprietors did not cover them with plywood; perhaps by installing
a photograph of a black woman proclaiming “I Am Not a Risk” would protect it from
rogue protestors. Maybe she wasn’t a “risk,” but somebody certainly was, since the proprietors of the place are today contemplating what to do
about their smashed windows. What the “protestors” who did this were protesting
against is anybody’s guess; maybe it is to show that nobody is “safe,” even for
these “progressive” fakers in Seattle.
No comments:
Post a Comment