I read the artical today in the Washington Post that tells the the story of the officer who possibly caused the mess with Henry Louis Gates. I'm wondering which one is in the wrong? Is either of them. If the officer is telling the truth then odds are it is no one's fault.
My dad was a police officer for the DNR for 25 years, and I know from expirience that police officers are perfectly capable of stealling, but usually only from the Department. (Handcuffs, and other neccasary supplies the department doesn't like to distribute properly).
I want to believe that its no one's fault and we can forget the entire thing. However I doubt it will end that way. The best this officer can hope for, guilty or innocent, is to keep a job as he said: "The professor at any time could have resolved the issue by quieting down and/or going back inside his house."
WhoWhat do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Even after this story has been "clarified," there is still so much we do not know. Obviously it is not right to arrest someone in their own house who is clearly not a threat, but it is also imperative that the innocent person remain calm.
ReplyDeleteIt is frustrating that this whole situation has gotten so out of hand and that it all could have been settled if the police had been more prompt with their response and apology.
I also cannot believe that the president went as far as to call the police stupid before the full story was even released.
This individual incident may not have been a case of racial profiling, or it may have been, but one thing is for sure- the poor cop who made the mistake of overreacting and taking away an innocent man in handcuffs will now be the scapegoat for every other instance of this that has ever happened. In a way, his example is needed to end racial profiling, but it is also sad that his career will most likely be ruined.
Hopefully, the officer's career will not be "ruined." He teaches classes on racial profiling and is described as a great officer, so I think he knows what he's doing and how to avoid being prejudiced.
ReplyDeleteWe do not have a video of what happened inside of the house. While Gates was likely not physically imposing, he still followed a police officer outside of his house, yelling at him the whole time.
I can easily see how they could legally arrest him for disorderly conduct just to "prove a point," although cops aren't really supposed to do that.
Both parties acted outside of their best judgement due to the heat of the moment, I believe.
And personally, Obama spoke too soon on this matter. He should have waited, like any public figure should, until the truth was actually resolved. Hopefully the Cambridge police department will not suffer from unpopularity and lack of funds due to the President's dismissal of them.
Score:
ReplyDeletePresident -15 (more but its his job to make uninformed desicions)
Cops -20 (arresting an innocent Professor and remaining quiet.) +5 (for the officer's classes) +5 (for eventually coming out with their story)
Prof. Gates -10 (For overreacting) -5 (For using his fame as a weapon baised on an overeaction)
I am so glad that you raised this issue. I myself was about to write a blog post about it.
ReplyDeleteI personally think that Professor Gates is blowing the situation out of proportion. If the events proceeded the way the officer claims, he was in no way "stupid" for arresting Gates.
Professor Banisky argues that Gates is a "diminutive" man and the officer should not have been intimidated. I think that anyone who is hostile or physically threatening towards a police officer should be arrested, regardless of whether or not he could have done him physical harm. The rules are the same for everyone.
New update on the story!
ReplyDeleteFrom The Baltimore Sun, read this:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/sns-ap-us-harvard-scholar-arresting-officer,0,2447203.story
If this is true and both police officers involved have nothing to hide, then why did they take so long to comment? It just seems a little strange. We should have known this the minute that Gates accused Crowley of racial profiling and then we could have assessed the situation better from the start. Why did they wait so long?
Very nice point Andi, the rules are the same. You can not let someone get away, becuase they would have been harmless, or because they are famous, or because they are Harvard Professors.
ReplyDeleteI completely support anything to fight Racism. Sometimes though I think people go too far. Such as employers being forced to hire minorities instead of others. The jobs should go to who ever has the better qualifications, and will do the better job. I think that suspected racial favoritism should be investigated in certian cases, but we take it too far.
An example: In the Maryland State Police, 25% of promotees must be of a minority (at bare minimum).
Agian, if they are qualified on thier own, then they will get the job anyway. Right? If racial favoritism is expected then call in an investigation, and in the end the more qualified person gets the job anyway.
I'm not actually proposing a better system, just trying to examine the flaws in the one that exists all ready.
ReplyDelete