Character. Resolve. Integrity. In short, these are the keys to dealing with the myriad problems we, as a nation are facing. People talk about hard choices in regards to these big problems (especially referring to the rise of ISIS/ISIL, and the Ferguson, MO riots). In truth, the choice to be made, if you are guided by character, resolve, and integrity, is pretty obvious, albeit scary. The obvious, but scary choice is to lead and do what is right without regard to the cost, financially, or politically. ISIS/ISIL is a fanatical group that wants to fight the USA. They will attack us from the side until they are stopped. If we do nothing, they get to advertise our weakness and grow their appeal and strength. They win. If we give a half-hearted military response, we will blow stuff up, hit our targets, and declare how much we care as proved by our restraint. The enemy will outlast us, advertise their strength and tenacity, and grow. They win. The only solution that results in us winning, them losing, and the threat they pose dissipating is as simple as it is scary. We have to fight to win. We have to pummel ISIS into dust so that the Jihadist culture cries uncle and finally quits. We dont have to be needlessly cruel, but we do have to be thorough. What are the chances the current President can even countenance such a reality-based decision? I wont hold my breath. Likewise, in Ferguson, MO, people of character need to take charge. Looting is lawlessness. It isnt street justice. Even if the crowd has a legitimate beef, it is not properly redressed by attacking the private property of other citizens. Justice is not found anywhere near the conduct of the violent mobs. The looters must be caught. They must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Lawfulness can only be restored if it is enforced. Some may say, But what about the racist police attacks on minorities? Whether or not that was the case in this instance is a matter for further discussion, and I will touch on it in a bit. The fact of the matter is that you dont encourage finding justice through lawlessness. If you want to fix racism, you can only do it effectively if you do so lawfully! Every time we have moved closer to the mythical ideal of equality we have done so lawfully. (Dont get me wrong, I do believe in equality under the law, but I also know humans are imperfect, so I dont expect to actually achieve the ideal.) If the police are acting in a racist fashion, and I have no doubt that some do, they will betray themselves, ultimately with verifiable facts, and they should be prosecuted harshly. But the key here is the existence of verifiable facts. Not suppositions. Not rumor. If you have a political agenda that demands you ignore facts to maintain it, your political belief is a bed of lies. Sorry. That is just how it is. Now, about the particulars of the Furgeson crisis: everyone is outraged at the idea of a cop shooting an unnamed person in the process of running away. Why? Because that conduct is abhorrent to the idea of law, especially if perpetrated by someone who represents the law. Also, it is shocking because it is the sort of thing we fear, but dont actually see very often or ever. It is conduct that is literally incongruent with what we believe about our country. Also, the claims are so strident, they should be supported by verifiable facts. It doesnt make sense that a cop would intentionally shoot someone without a threat, unless the officer had actual malice. If the officer had actual malice is it reasonable to believe that he never would have been disciplined in a multi-year career prior to this? Is it reasonable that his first instance of (race-based malice) manifests itself as a broad daylight murder in front of many witnesses presumably sympathetic to the victim? If he was shot while running away, why are the bullet holes in front? Clearly, he wasnt running away. The next point is whether the officer reasonably believed he was facing a threat. It is now being reported as VERIFIED that the officer suffered a severe beating, including broken bones around an eye. So we can assume the officer would believe a threat was credible and severe, if Mr. Brown was doing something to appear to be actively threatening the officer. The officer reported, and it has been corroborated that Mr. Brown was charging on the officer. The geometry of the bullet entry wounds is consistent with this. Simply put, the officer could not have been elevated enough to shoot down into Mr. Browns face and head unless it was lowered and tilted forward, as it would have been in a charge. Why go over these facts? Because our character as a people is being tested. The only way to pass this test is to face the facts. Test allegations to find truth, and resolve to impose justice with integrity however the law would dictate. Only a leader with integrity can face the stark path of justice. But the choice IS clear.
Posted on: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 02:37:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015