Sunday, June 14, 2020

The media and “community leaders” need to stop “justifying” mindless destruction and criminal activity—and there is more than one “culture” to blame


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