Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Reblogged: Moving Past the Fergusons

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Three editorials taken together go very far in making sense of the chaos in Ferguson, Missouri, that has existed since Michael Brown was fatally shot by a police officer. The first offers an explanation of the clearly evident outrage, but without addressing the equally obvious problem of opportunists seizing an opportunity to wreak havoc. The second -- and the most important in my opinion -- does the best job of explaining the chaos facing black leaders genuinely interested in progress. The third illustrates, by way of example, the cultural problem indicated by the second. The authors are, respectively, Leonard Pitts, Jr. of the Miami Herald, Joseph Epstein of the Wall Street Journal, and Jesse Jackson, Sr.

Pitts writes that the protests are not just about Michael Brown. Pitts's piece reminds us of a broader historical context and is worth reading, especially for those of us in physical proximity to the events, and who might be wondering if any of this is even about Michael Brown:

t is about the bitter sense of siege that lives in African-American men, a sense that it is perpetually open season on us.

And that too few people outside of African America really notice, much less care. People who look like you are everyday deprived of health, wealth, freedom, opportunity, education, the benefit of the doubt, the presumption of innocence, life itself -- and when you try to say this, even when you document it with academic studies and buttress it with witness testimony, people don't want to hear it, people dismiss you, deny you, lecture you about white victimhood, chastise you for playing a so-called "race card."

There is no disputing that black men are worse off by many measures than almost any other demograpic group, and seeing that on a daily basis can be an enormous psychological burden.

However, as Joseph Epstein indicates, there is plenty of room for disagreement as to why so many black men remain poorly-off and feel unable to change things:

... The old dead analyses, the pretty panaceas, are paraded. Yet nothing new is up for discussion. Discussion itself is off the table. Except when Bill Cosby, Thomas Sowell or Shelby Steele and a few others have dared to speak about the pathologies at work--and for doing so, these black figures are castigated.

And, much later:

The situation today for a civil-rights leader is not so clear, and in many ways more complex. After the victories half a century ago, civil rights may be a misnomer. Economics and politics and above all culture are now at the heart of the problem. Blacks largely, and inexplicably, remain pledged to a political party whose worn-out ideas have done little for them while claiming much. Slipping off the too-comfortable robes of victimhood is essential, as is discouraging
everything in ghetto culture that has dead-end marked all over it
. The task is enormous, the person likely to bring it off, a modern-day Moses able to lead his people out of the desert, nowhere in sight. Until that person or persons arrives, we can expect more nights like those in Ferguson, with cries of racism, with looters and bottom-feeders turning up, with sadness all round. [link added]

While I am not sure a "modern-day Moses" is strictly necessary, I agree with Epstein's assessement of the situation faced by black Americans as transitional. I would go further than Epstein in my assessment of the quality of the "civil rights" establishment: I see them as derelict at best.

Jesse Jackson, Sr. offers us a prime example, in the form of an editorial that appeared recently in USA Today:

Here's America today: high unemployment and low graduation rates result in guns and drugs in and jobs out; hospitals and public schools closing; gym, art, music and trade skills taken out of our public schools; inadequate investments being made in our infrastructure with roads crumbling, bridges falling down and an outdated public transportation system;
a failure to address climate change
; denial of capital investment for entrepreneurs; abandoned homes and vacant lots; a lack of youth recreational opportunities; frivolous entertainment, texting and Twitter replacing serious news reporting, reading, writing and arithmetic; a cutback in funding and a denial of equal opportunity in public jobs such as for teachers, policemen and firemen; all of which leads to hopelessness, despair and cynicism. [bold added]

Yes. After ironically alluding to the failed War on Poverty, Jesse Jackson calls for more of the same, and, for good measure, takes the death of a young man as a chance to hawk big government solutions to ... global warming, of all things. Not anywhere is there a hint of Jackson considering whether our nation's government has created or worsened any of the real problems faced by the country in general and black men in particular -- or a clue that he might consider a real alternative to trying to solve everything through central planning.

It is supremely ironic, given that Jim Crow, a government program for keeping black people down, didn't make black leaders as highly suspicious of intrusive government as the American people were around the time of the Revolution. As Thomas Jefferson might have asked: Might a government big enough to pass loot around also be big enough to sap the pride and initiative -- and the sense that there is opportunity out there for the taking -- from an entire people?

Leonard Pitts argues that black men endure heavy psychological pressure from the idea that their options are purposely limited by the society around them. But Joseph Epstein makes it clear, and Jesse Jackson demonstrates, that it is time to stop and question the premise behind those feelings. Opportunities are, in fact, partly limited by vestigial (and vanishing) racism, prejudice, culture, and bad government. How to make the most out of what opportunities are open and how to fight the right battles to become as free as anyone else require what is most sorely missing in this whole sad episode, and many others like it: A rational examination of facts (including one's emotions), with the overall purpose of determining what is best for one's life and how to achieve it.

This is not to minimize the incredible burden it must be to go through life seeing poverty and hearing from all corners that the deck is stacked against you -- or the horror of seeing someone much like you killed out of the blue. But self-control and careful thought are, in fact, the way to win anyway.

Anyone can take away your freedom or your life, but no one can touch your soul unless you let them.

-- CAV

Link to Original

Link to comment
Share on other sites

or the horror of seeing someone much like you killed out of the blue.

Based on pictures of Michael Brown taken from social media (pictures showing him holding a gun, stacks of money, and flashing gang signs), he was either a gang member or at least an aspiring gang member. 

 

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/breaking-michael-brown-was-a-local-gangster-seen-flashing-gang-signs/

 

Even if that's the case, seeing him die is still a horror for his family I suppose, but you really can't say it's "out of the blue". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They trimmed several photos off of the gang-sign link from when I viewed it earlier. Pitts article could have also included (St.) Malice (the Belligerent) Greene, who along with Rodney King bring the spotlight onto cases where officers, doing their job, get hung in the court of public opinion. Officer Darren Williams made a split second decision in the heat of an encounter. Given the emerging details on Michael Brown makes this case another potential candidate for misidentifying who might be the real victim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the store video, released yesterday, it's clear that Brown was a thuggish kid and a thief. Still, it would not justify the cop shooting him if he was surrendering, as some witnesses claim. The case is going to hinge on the credibility of the witnesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CNN offers some details that place the initial confrontation at the police vehicle. While the initial shot(s?) fired may have been over a struggle with/for the officer's gun, the later shots fired as Michael was leaving the vicinity, do not bode well for the officer. Unless the police vehicle was moved, the body was clearly distanced from the initial confrontation as captured in this video taken after the shooting was over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reason magazine reports that Mississippi allows the use of deadly force by a policeman to stop a felon from escaping.

Wow! What series of terrible false justifications must have gone down to put something like this on the books... The catch-all laws which allow the worst cops to make arrests at whim are bad enough. But it doesn't get worse than outright permission to use deadly force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow! What series of terrible false justifications must have gone down to put something like this on the books... The catch-all laws which allow the worst cops to make arrests at whim are bad enough. But it doesn't get worse than outright permission to use deadly force.

I don't know. When a cop shouts "stop, or I'll shoot!" Should that be an empty threat? Sometimes? always? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. When a cop shouts "stop, or I'll shoot!" Should that be an empty threat? Sometimes? always? 

No, I don't think it should ever be an empty threat, ideally. But these days, the bar for stopping people is very low, and there are so many felonies that it's impossible to know them all. At least a few of the felonies can be used as "catch-all" laws for cops to legally exercise force at whim. Cops already use catch-all laws to pull people over on the road, to stop and question them, and to arrest them.

 

I doubt there are many(/any) cops that walk around thinking, "All I have to do is find someone walking next to a federal building after 9pm [made-up felony], and I can try to surprise them into a felony arrest so I can shoot them dead." But, the worst cops who are aware of this deadly-force law are at minimum going to be less concerned about getting in trouble if things go all the way south during an arrest for an alleged felony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I don't think it should ever be an empty threat, ideally. But these days, the bar for stopping people is very low, and there are so many felonies that it's impossible to know them all. At least a few of the felonies can be used as "catch-all" laws for cops to legally exercise force at whim. Cops already use catch-all laws to pull people over on the road, to stop and question them, and to arrest them.

 

I doubt there are many(/any) cops that walk around thinking, "All I have to do is find someone walking next to a federal building after 9pm [made-up felony], and I can try to surprise them into a felony arrest so I can shoot them dead." But, the worst cops who are aware of this deadly-force law are at minimum going to be less concerned about getting in trouble if things go all the way south during an arrest for an alleged felony.

The claim made by the cop is that his assailant tried to take his gun. Assuming that's true, should he have allowed a person who just tried to kill a cop get away?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The claim made by the cop is that his assailant tried to take his gun. Assuming that's true, should he have allowed a person who just tried to kill a cop get away?

Of course not. I'm about the furthest away from familiarity with existing law, but wouldn't an action like this be covered under some other code or law?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not. I'm about the furthest away from familiarity with existing law, but wouldn't an action like this be covered under some other code or law?

I suppose you could have a better definition of what constitutes a serious crime (felony) than what western countries use at the moment, but, beyond that, I can't think of an objective enough way to draw the line on when cops should allow a criminal to escape when

the only alternative is the use of deadly force.

[edit] When I say "objective enough", I mean objective enough to allow charging a cop with murder. Obviously there should be other criteria used for training cops, and evaluating their job performance, they shouldn't just be told to go out there and shoot every felon that looks like is getting away.

But those criteria will always to some extent be subject to interpretation. Cops shouldn't have to face life in prison over making an error like that, they should be facing unemployment.

Edited by Nicky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wikipedia says that, since 1985, the use of deadly force to stop fleeing felons has been limited to cases where the suspect would do serious physical harm to others if he flees. So, I'm not sure how Mississippi's law fits with that.

 

With that said, the witnesses on TV have been saying that Brown had his hands up and was surrendering. One of his relatives was suggesting that Brown was going down on his knees. If true, this would not be a case of a fleeing felon anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an article by a father of someone shot by the police. He argues for independent investigation of any such police-shooting. It makes a whole lot of sense that such investigations not be controlled at a local level. State-level audit and oversight, if not control, seems an obvious check against abuse.

Edited by softwareNerd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An unexpected "microphone was on" testimony of what was observed to have happened describes Michael Brown as doubling back from the 35 foot retreat position, and kept coming at Officer Williams as he fired off the multiple shots.

In that case, he wasn't shot in the back. Easy enough to verify. If he wasn't shot in the back, the witnesses are lying, and that's that. There's no case against the cop, not even a little one.

[edit] Authopsy results are out, right on time: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=2

He was not shot in the back, only in the front. He wasn't shot as he was running away, he obviously doubled back. End of story. Pack up your rioting gear and go home people.

Edited by Nicky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case, he wasn't shot in the back. Easy enough to verify. If he wasn't shot in the back, the witnesses are lying, and that's that. There's no case against the cop, not even a little one.

[edit] Authopsy results are out, right on time: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/18/us/michael-brown-autopsy-shows-he-was-shot-at-least-6-times.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=2

He was not shot in the back, only in the front. He wasn't shot as he was running away, he obviously doubled back. End of story. Pack up your rioting gear and go home people.

Apparently the Black Panther's have either not read the reports, or the reports are irrelevant to their agenda. 

 

What is very discouraging is the lack of concern for gathering the relevant facts prior to acting on erroneous conclusions.

 

Edit: From the article:

Mr. Johnson said that he hid behind a parked car and that Mr. Brown was struck by a bullet in his back as he ran away, an account that Dr. Baden’s autopsy appears to contradict.

 

The autopsy indicates that no bullets entered from behind. And this only appears to contradict Mr. Johnson's report? For real? What does it take for it to actually contradict it, Frances and Julie?

Edited by dream_weaver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roughly 12 miles away from Ferguson,  St. Louis City police shoot and kill a knife-wielding suspect. Keep in mind, a skilled knife wielding man at 3 to 4 feet away can be more deadly than one with a gun, which is the distance claimed this fatal shooting took place. This is not to claim the man wielding the knife was skilled in its use. A notable difference here is the victim was verbally requesting that he be shot. Given the already high alert in the area, this event is not likely to help deescalate the situation being addressed in the St. Louis area.

 

A short aside:

I've had some training in martial arts to defend against several scripted knife attacks. Even under those controlled conditions, an occasional injury came about.

I'd still rather attempt any of those choreographed techniques than to hope a rubber bullet fired from a gun in my possession would stop an intent assailant with a knife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Selected excerpts from the Washington Post.

Evidence supports officer’s account of shooting in Ferguson


Some of the physical evidence — including blood spatter analysis, shell casings and ballistics tests — also supports Wilson’s account of the shooting, The Post’s sources said, which cast Brown as an aggressor who threatened the officer’s life.

Experts told the newspaper that Brown was first shot at close range and may have been reaching for Wilson’s weapon while the officer was still in his vehicle and Brown was standing at the driver’s side window. The autopsy found material “consistent with products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm” in a wound on Brown’s thumb, the autopsy says.

Jurors have also been provided with the St. Louis County autopsy report, including toxicology test results for Brown that show he had levels of Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active ingredient in marijuana. The Post’s sources said the levels in Brown’s body may have been high enough to trigger hallucinations.

 

The good news is that Officer Wilson is not likely to face charges for doing his job.

 

Former Police Chief Speaks on Latest Michael Brown Shooting Information


Fitch says he thinks the feds recognize that it’s “probably very unlikely” that there’s going to be charges against Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

The New York Times reports:

 

Justice Dept. to Recommend No Civil Rights Charges in Ferguson Shooting

The Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer involved in the fatal shooting of an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday.

 

Also in the article:

The Justice Department plans to release a report explaining its decision, though it is not clear when. Dena Iverson, a department spokeswoman, declined to comment on the case Wednesday.

 

As the investigation draws to a close, I find myself reflecting on the responses here.

 

In general, I have less respect for those in the legislative and higher executive branches of government. The men and women of the police departments are in a difficult spot. My youngest brother served for a while as an officer and shared that the police face the most negative elements of society. Mark Scott, the local talk show host I listened to for years, had a healthy respect for most police officers, while providing lots of critique for many of the laws and regulations that contributed to the environment in which they work.

 

Just as the overall system of government has safeguards that have taken years to get around, the police have to answer for their actions too. From internal affairs, right up the line - policies and procedures are implemented to help maintain law and order.

 

On a more disturbing note, part of the public at large seems to be directing their ire at the police. Former officer Wilson chose to resign as a consequence of this event. Were that the outcry on this matter to be raised to this level when government passes bad legislation - that the politician responsible for it resign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...