Part Two
conclusion - its off my chest
seemed appropiate - the pic that is for the blog
I intend to
address the other part of the problem with what we perceive as race problems
where one race is slighted more than another and that is in the response of
police to questions of race differences and applying the law equally to one class
of people as opposed to another and I doubt it has to do with race and more
with poverty if anything. If you live in a rich neighborhood and drive a
Mercedes and have Dr.’s plates , chances are you less likely to be stopped or
put under the scope, to determine what part of the law you have broken. Whether
a Dr. is black or white, brown, or another color or may be a female, as is
often the case, these folks are less likely to be stopped for a variety of
reasons but I doubt race has little to do with it. If you wear a hood and look
ratty in a new Mercedes driving down the road with the lights blinking and the
horn blowing you may be pulled over.
If you don’t like
living in the hood, move the heck out because this alone subjects you to more
scrutiny than anything else. If it is your childhood home and seem to be locked
there. Work at making it better, and at same time safer. Bloom where you live.
If a drug house moves in next door then call the police, don’t make deals with
them. Where you live and the amount of crime in your area has a direct
reflection of where the police are going to concentrate their effort as this is
also where most profiling occurs.
No matter where
you live a family structure needs to be maintained and it is the parents who
must set the standards all children live up to. You play with guns someone will
be shot, I just hope it isn’t your family that has to suffer. If you cheat,
drink, lie, and steal, your kids will assume it is ok to do the same thing.
Although you may do drugs, your children should never have to observe you, the
parent in a dazed state, or witness your abuse. Your abuse should never be an
acceptable part of a family unit. A simple
thing such as dinners at a set time each night with few exceptions are
important to keep abreast of what is happening to your family.
At first I have
described those things are important to a family structure. A home, a stable
life, and values you all agree on as you grow along with your kids, as well being
more of an individual instead of thinking like a group and not let peer
pressure decide the direction of your life and your family. Church has an
important part in your religious experience but don’t let them dictate to you what
politics or a direction you need to move in for you and the congregation’s
benefit. If it is a good purpose and has nothing to do with issues like race, politics,
and personal wealth, then use your judgment. All those good folks out there are
not all good. Religion has no place in politics and likewise politics has no
use in religion as defined by the constitution where they talk of a separation
of power between church and state. Additionally churches should not be able to
endorse one candidate over another except based on his or her record, and
additionally they should never be allowed to support a candidate financially.
Again it is hard to not corrupt the thoughts of a politician to lend favoritism
to a church where it becomes necessary for the government to make decisions regarding
the church’s welfare.
I am kind of
brainstorming here to make ideas come to the surface for further discussion. If
none of it is used then at least you had an open mind to read this far and have
gave me my due time. There is no profit in any of this for me instead a chance
to try and leave this world a little better than I found it. That is always a
tough job when more has been wronged in the last 59 years than has been right.
The problems existed way before my time and debts have been repaid but still
the bar is always being raised higher.
Again I don’t
think race plays such a large part in the proportions of black men being shot
or killed, instead I believe it is in the first reactions of both parties as to
the outcome of what is going to happen. Maybe if every time we did raise our
hands in symbolic gesture of please don’t harm me I mean you no harm , then maybe after seeing it awhile the police
would understand that this means layoff with the police brutality. Now I would
be quite willing to lie on the ground if an officer gets down there with me and
I see this as a form of superiority reminiscent of Nazism of World War 2, where
people would grovel at the feet of the soldiers to avoid death at the hands of Nazi
soldiers. Discontent of any kind resulted in death and supported their belief
in being superior humans. The Andy Griffiths out there are far and few between.
I am sure there are good and bad in everything including cops and criminals.
The police have become the first line of defense or offense as the case may be
for the state , a lot of times becoming the judge and grand jury determining
whether someone will stand trial and sufficient evidence is accumulated to make
the charges stick. They have to much leverage and use it to their advantage to
often. It seems the rules are changed on a need to basis determined by the
legality of what they can get by with. A lot of times it isn’t based on factual
evidence, instead on a hunch. Evidence can only be gathered when all of the
facts are known. In 2 seconds after you pull a car into a park, and observe a
young adult brandishing a firearm or what appears to be one, is still not
enough evidence to justify shooting the perpetrator.
Time should be
taken with safety in mind that would allow more time to ascertain whether it
was indeed a regular weapon capable of killing someone and if the person would
respond to verbal commands to lay the weapon down at least. Having them assume
the hands up position would assure the officer the perpetrator is not armed any
longer and is of little danger, and then a dialogue to establish a rapport to
gather more evidence should occur. Effort on behalf of the arresting officer
needs to be offered as a means of diffusing instead of exacerbating an already
inflamed situation. Should it be necessary some basic questions need to be answered
by the officer prepared to escalate and take control of the situation. Is the
person a threat first to someone else, and then to himself, if you answer yes
to either question go to question 2, is he capable of harming the other person.
Is he waving the gun or is he have a gun at the head of someone , not moving
the muzzle or is it aimed at yourself even with a hostage in his hands. If he I
aiming it at himself go to question 3 , if he refuses to follow orders and a
hostage situation appears to be escalating to a death or it involves yourself
as officer doing his duty , then prepare to fire in a way to possibly disable
him from the shock of being fired upon. In the instance of waving of a gun,
then shoot to disarm. In the event of a gun to someone’s head or in the case of
your own life do the best you can to contain the situation.
A distraught or
mentally disturbed person should be handled with kid gloves but at no time
allow yourself or another to be harmed if at all possible. Shooting to disarm
or incapacitate is probably the best option. While negotiating shoot off a
round unexpectedly to allow yourself an option to contain the situation and
scare the hell out of the person with whom your intent is aimed at. Again try
to talk the person into hands up situation if possible. Also I wonder if
tranquilizing darts in a separate handgun should be used in cases where the
person is combative and refuses to cooperate.
Explain to the
supposed perpetrator that they are being held for questioning and their rights
according to the Miranda provisions. As long as they are not combative and
agree to return to the police headquarters, then they will be allowed to search
your person in the presence of your lawyer and a representative of the prosecutor’s
office if it is deemed to be necessary. If you are combative then whatever
necessary restraint is necessary can be administered by the arresting officer
as long as there is another officer present and agrees to the restraint.
I was talking to
a person who had went through the police academy or had taken courses and
actually served as an officer and she had told me that if you use your gun then
you are taught to shoot to kill . If it is that serious that you needed to use
the gun then make sure they don’t get back to you. From what I have read of the
Missouri killing the officer pretty much followed true to form. The theory of
the police in using a weapon and unloading it into him is if he gets back to
you then he may take the gun away from you and use it on you. So you need to
make sure that doesn’t happen. I would think the shock of being fired upon
would be enough for most people to stop their shit, and do whatever it takes to
get out alive. I would have to wound a person if necessary. Shooting to kill
would always be last resort. I would hate to think that is the mindset of the
police officers we encounter on an everyday basis. To think that something
small could turn into a person losing their life. Cigarettes or cigarillos, it
doesn’t matter smoking will kill you if you re black and live in city doubly
so.
Was it racial
profiling? I imagine to a degree it was but it is like I said if you live in
the city and in an area of high crime or slums mostly populated by people of
your own color and an officer is patrolling a high crime area and he is of
another color, why wouldn’t he be suspicious of everyone if he wasn’t from that
area. We expect them to be observant, if the youth would have went to the
sidewalk and did as he was told who knew what the outcome would be. Instead
there were words and a scuffle. If he was an officer of the same color or race
would it have been different, doubt it. He would probably be suspicious also.
We won’t know.
If he was in an all-white
or Caucasian city and a robbery occurred and they said they didn’t know the
race of the person and you were a black in town visiting someone and an officer
stops you and because of your color arrests you for the theft then you have
racial profiling. Because you were black and the only one in town and your race
is known to steal then you must be guilty, purely hypothetical but to me that
is racial profiling. In the Missouri case the officer had noticed certain parts
of his clothes that fit the description of the person who robbed a shop minutes
before around the corner and roughed up the owner. He had reasonable grounds to
hold or detain him. Still I think he should have waited for backup before attempting
to confront the man. I don’t believe it was racial profiling. In the New York
case the guy had been known to sell loose cigarettes avoiding the high cost and
paying taxes. It was a living for the guy, and for such a petty crime why the
violence to take him down. Write him a ticket and order him to appear and leave
it alone for another day. Why kill him?
Still all you
hear is it is white against black, we are profiling and systematically stifling
the black man. I think it is more an atmosphere of police overkill to say the
least. They train the officers to be aggressive from the start of a
confrontation and instilling a sense of order to take control of the situation.
Also everyone is against them, well yeah , like I have said before if they pull
you over chances are you are getting a ticket. And if they pulled me over to
say you are doing a good job driving I would probably kick the shit out of
them anyway. They have a thankless job but it is the job they choose. They are
the judge and jury when you re along the road, they can make or break you, so
you need to always be on the defensive and be observant. But somewhere you have
to realize that you need to leave the job behind and be a citizen and be out
there with the people you arrest. So being an ass may get you in trouble if
someone recognizes you. You always have
to be above reproach as that is your job. 24 hours a day 7 days a week , 365
days a year. I couldn’t do it. Darn I would never pass the piss test in the
first place, but then again it would be a good way to score some stash.
And in
conclusion I think everyone needs to smoke a doobie a day and we would be much
better off. Looks like selling loose joints on the street is coming soon as the
federal government has ended raiding of pot stores and says it will quit
prosecuting pot cases. Maybe there is hope for our nation. Maybe bring back a
Cheech and Chong movie ‘Up in Smoke 3- Smokin with the Prez. From a row house
to the White House’. Wonder what is growing in the greenhouse at the White House.
I guess I am an idealist after all.
No comments:
Post a Comment