Just so you know that Im sincere, understand that this post only has a shot of going viral if it falls squarely on one side or the other. It doesnt. I have looked at the Eric Garner case, or at least looked at all of the available information, and determined that I cannot personally determine whether this NYPD officer ought to be charged with a crime. There is a compelling case to be made for it, and a compelling case to be made against it. Again, a hey, lets look at both sides approach doesnt resonate and doesnt really work in the blogging world, so Im sacrificing the web traffic in hopes that whoever takes the time to read will come away with, at a minimum, an appreciation for the complexities of this situation. Im aware that plenty of conservative commentators like Glenn Beck and Charles Krauthammer have come down firmly against the grand jury decision. I think they could be wrong. I definitely believe that this isnt nearly as straightforward as everyone seems to think. That said, I do know a few things sure. Specifically, two things: there is no evidence that this arrest was racially motivated, and to suggest that it was without proof is the height of irresponsibility. Also, possibly the biggest culprit in this tragedy is the horrible Nanny State law that these officers were tasked with enforcing. Its true that Garners only crime, this time around, was selling untaxed cigarettes. Its also true that nobody should die over that. But the best way to ensure nobody dies over it is to not create a law that criminalizes the act of selling someone one of the cigarettes in your pack. All laws must be enforced, and all enforcement will be done with men with guns, which means all enforcement carries the risk of fatal escalation. Maybe the onus and a large part of the blame, then, should fall on the politicians who use these men with guns as glorified IRS agents and State fundraisers:
Posted on: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 18:43:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015