Renowned law professor and author Stanley Fish, in a New York Times article , compares Prof. Henry Louis Gates’ tenure at Duke University to the recent Gates/Police incident, and the so-called “birthers”’ weird obsession with Pres. Obama’s birth certificate. It sheds some light on a situation that has become a national mirror, so it’s worth your time to check it out — especially since what we’re seeing in the mirror ain’t pretty.
A few observations: Both men involved in the Cambridge incident could have handled themselves better, but with that said, here is the basic fact that sticks in my craw: No matter how angry Gates became, this is a smallish man who walks with a cane who was standing in his own home legally, and who had shown the policeman his driver’s license as well as his Harvard I.D. Police officers are capable of walking away from a situation in which there’s been a mistake. The policeman would have been much wiser to drop the matter, maybe tell Gates, “Your shouting is out of line and disorderly, but this is obviously your home, so we’re just going to be on our way.” That’s the “no harm, no foul” attitude that can often take the heat out of situations.
Prof. Fish, in the NY Times article, says Gates was guilty of being in a nice house while black. That could have played a part in the incident, but considering the officer’s history of teaching other officers to avoid racial profiling, my guess is that Gates’ arrest was, as Bill Maher suggested on CNN yesterday, less of a racial problem than “a police problem. . . Gates was arrested for the crime of not kissing the behind of the police officer.” These days, it’s an open secret that most police officers expect complete submission from anyone they’re speaking to, at all times, which is, to be blunt, a tyrannical attitude. Yes, I know, police work is hard and dangerous every day all day long, etc., etc., but somehow that danger has become an excuse to treat most citizens like scum. When the British routinely acted that way toward colonists in, yes, Boston and Cambridge, it was considered reason enough to revolt. Today, though, in our high-strung society, it’s somehow accepted that if you appear to be angry with a cop, you can expect to go to jail, no matter who is right or wrong. Plainly and simply, that stinks, and needs to be changed.
This article appears in Jul 28 – Aug 4, 2009.
“Instead gates became aggressive and mean spirited and disorderly so he was charged and taken away end of story.”
No, frank, I don’t think so, and your conspicuous omission is very telling.
Being “charged and taken away” was not the end of the story, because the charges were dropped. That makes it clear that your “Gates bad Cop good” is at best a biased, one-sided view.
It’s a shame that you can’t see, as “a normal human being” would, that there are two sides to this story.
This past March 29th, Professor Henry Louis Gates was being interviewed in front of a small group by Walter Isaacson on C-SPAN’s Book TV. Thirty-three minutes into the discussion about his new book on Lincoln, Professor Gates began a detailed account of his own genealogy. He said that in doing so he had discovered he was about “50% white”. He said that this was quote, “To my astonishment and horror…”.
He continued by saying that he had subsequently sent his DNA off to be tested. This time, upon finding out he was “57% white”, he said again, “to my horror …. I was becoming more white by the minute”. To this Gates, Isaacson and everyone else there chuckled.
Something tells me that if Mr. Isaacson had said that he also had sent his DNA off and found that to his “astonishment and horror” he was 57% black, no one would chuckle, least of all the Professor of African American Studies at Harvard, Dr. Gates.
Grooms best wake up or he might not have a job irking the working class.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/07/impersonating_a_victim.html
which Grooms obviously isn’t.
Excerpt from
I’ve recently talked to 2 local police officers who said that the officer was in the wrong in arresting Gates. Crowley showed poor judgment.
Once Gates showed ID the officer should have apologized and promptly left the scene. He was on private property, identified the owner, and should have left immediately which would have quickly defused the situation — regardless of the insults Gates showered on him. I see it as a battle of egos getting out of hand.
It also speaks volumes that the DA dropped the charges so quickly.
So the officer and Gates were both wrong, but officer had no reason to arrest Gates.
Grooms mangled some details? No. Oh wait, he did.
Gates was not arrested in his home. Gates was arrested outside of his house, where he had followed the police officer who was attempting to leave the premises. Gates was showing diesrespect to a uniformed officer in view of other members of the public, and was warned a couple of times to calm down or he would be arrested for being disorderly. I don’t know what you were taught, Grooms, when you were a kid, but I was taught that when a cop tells you to calm down or you’ll be arrested, you calm down, or get arrested.
But then, to top off this whole pathetic excuse for journalism, or whatever you call it, you post Gate’s mugshot as if it is inconceivable that someone who looks as innocent as Gates could be a criminal. So what should a criminal look like, Grooms? Should a criminal have tattoos? Should they have piercings? Should they be sneering? Should they have long hair? Should they be a different race?
Here’s the lesson learned from the incident: If you are in your house legally, then show proof and let the officer leave your house in peace. Also, if you’re president of the United States, and don’t know any of the facts, don’t comment on the story.
If the Police enter my property for suspicion of a break-n, and I produce identification that I reside there, the polie should leave.If they take offense when I express my idignation, and do not leave, I would exercise my rights under the Second Ammendment.