Having studied African American literature, part of which included reading the writings of Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr., Director of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for African and American Research at Harvard, I was shocked to read headlines of his arrest earlier this week.

After reading the circumstances surrounding the arrest, I quickly jumped to the same conclusion Barack Obama professed at the end of his news conference on health care.  The police responded properly to a call from a concerned neighbor about "big, black men breaking into a house."  They questioned the suspect(s).

And then things got stupid.

According to the arresting police officer, Sgt. James Crowly, Gates was uncooperative about providing his identification and accused him of racism.
Words were exchanged.  Gates made reference to Crowly's mother saying, "I'll speak with your mama outside," when Crowly asked him to come onto the porch (where Crowly then arrested Gates for disorderly conduct).

If I know police officer behaviors in this type of situation (and I do), many officers would respond to belligerance with a show of authority and demonstration of force.  Crowly did so by arresting a middle-aged man who had proved that he was in his own house, essentially for pissing him off.

Then Obama jumped into the mix (click the link for the video) when asked a specific question by Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun Times:  "Recently," she said, "Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was arrested at his home...What does this incident say to you and what does it say about race relations in America?"

Obama gave, as usual, a nuanced answer.  He stated two potential issues with his opinion up front: He is Gates's friend and he didn't know all the facts.  He then went into a summary of what he did know and said, while he didn't know what role race played in the incident, he had three opinions:

1. Any of us would be pretty angry if we treated as Gates was in his own home.
2.  The Cambridge police "acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home."
3.  Apart from this incident, there is "a long hisotry of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportianally."  He called such incidents a sign that race remains a factor in this society.

My only quibble with Obama's statement, assigning all of the stupidity to the police, was remedied in his comments in a Nightline interview where he said "everybody should have settled down and cooler heads would have prevailed."

After that LONG intro, let me add my two bits.

First, I believe that the police officer did act in an inappropriate and uninformed manner...especially if his major "damage" was the comment about his mama.  White Americans do not understand such comments within their racial and historical context.  Verbal insults to family and person are a common form of teasing called "the dozens" among African Americans.  In charged situations, one often reaches for sarcastic humor.  And as one commentator put it, "This was the supreme humiliation for Henry Louis Gates, because he has achieved a rarefied status and the considerations that are usually afforded to him went right out the window when the officer arrested him. In a minute, that cop erased all that Gates has had to work through to get where he is."

Conversely, Gates acted in an inappropriate manner by assuming the police officer's motives were racial.  Despite his personal history as a black man in America (which undoubtedly includes instances of overt racism), Gates should have had a "cooler head" and discussed the issue more rationally.  Yes, he was tired.  Yes, he had just gotten back from a long overseas journey.  And still, it would have gone better if he'd bitten his tongue.  Because I believe his comments and challenging of Crowly's authority "erased" all of Crowly's hard work to be a good, middle-class cop.  The status that Crowly is used to as a police officer was challenged by an angry, privileged black man (which tells me class as well as race were likely in the emotional mix.)

Third, the media's narrow reporting of Obama's comment about stupidity, without giving the full context and disclaimers of his remarks, perpetuates the sound bite downfall of true news in our society.  Everyone has a point to make and they want to make it using a few, out of context, words and get on their way.

That's not news.  It's faux news.  And it's not fair to Gates, Crowly or Obama.  Nor is it fair to the people who swallow today's news pill and think they understand what happened.

The solution?  Reading.  Watching full responses to questions. Studying our history and what informs our opinions and reactions.  Looking at both sides and trying to grasp the views from each pair of shoes involved.  Not accepting a sound bite or headline as telling the broader story.

 


Comments

Mom #1

Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:21:57

Excellent analysis, my dear.
Love, Mom

 

Steve Peden

Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:26:15

Umm . . . what part of "don't be a smartass with cops" hasn't anyone over the age of 18 learned, yet????

Let me put you a coupla truths:

"playing the dozens"???? Dear, you do that with FRIENDS. If you slag somebody's momma, in the 'hood, you'd better be ready to throw down. NOT what you say to a cop.

"long history" of disproportionate justice, eh? Like that very expensive study that Illinois State Senator Obama sponsored and had done (at the cost of MILLIONS of dollars of taxpayer money) to prove that Chicago/Illinois cops were profiling, and that ACTUALLY proved the contrary? THAT history? The "history" of unfair and unequal treatment SOLELY based on skin color is just that - history. Did it happen? Of course. Is it the huge, "daily occurrence for a black man" thing the liberals make it out to be? Not for any of the black kids I know - including the ones that go to school with Connor on scholarships, and regularly drive into our lilly-white, upper-middle class enclave from their more "diverse," urban neighborhoods - and, strangely, don't seem to get hassled at all. Funny, that.

We'd "all be upset" to be treated like Gates? First, I WOULDN'T get treated like Gates, because I am much too smart to mouth off to the cops like that. I would have IMMEDIATELY showed my ID, thanked the officer for his attention to trying to protect my property, and gone on about my business.

Gates acted like a horse's ass, and wouldn't back down when told, in no uncertain terms, he was out of line. (Many witnesses to this, BTW, and his NEIGHBOR called the cops on him in the first place). If he had just STFU, the situation would have been OVER. Instead, he went into his full-on race pimp mode, and got his butt arrested for it. And what's his response????? He's getting more press than his sorry butt has had in years, and he's threatening to make a PBS documentary about the "racist" cops in Cambridge (snicker, snort!). Al Sharpton, teaching at Harvard.

And Obama's comment, NUANCED???!?!?!??!?!??!

As one person of my acquaintance said, "The words 'I don't know all the facts' should NEVER be followed by anything other than 'so it would not be appropriate for me to comment at this time'" Unfortunately, Mr. "I approach every subject with an open mouth" had to jump in and (i) do a solid for his old buddy Skip, (ii) enforce his bona fides as an AUTHENTIC black man, and (iii) pander (apparently, successfully) to his liberal base by slagging the cops instead of his horse's ass, big mouth friend.

That's NUANCED????? He makes W look like Einstein.

 

Kenneth R. Morefield

Fri, 24 Jul 2009 21:44:15

It was scripted theater. If you think, after running the campaign he did, that President Obama just sort of went off message in his press conference, I have some land I want to sell you.

By answering the question the way he did, and then calling the cop, he gets to appease both sides, first by siding with the black community and then by giving a face save to the cops. The story lives another cycle, and everyone gets what they want. Masterfully played.

Steve said:
<em>First, I WOULDN'T get treated like Gates, because</em>...

There are a lot of reasons one could end that sentence with that would be true. Steve's reason was one of them, though, I confess, not the first reason that jumped to my mind.

 

Kenneth R. Morefield

Fri, 24 Jul 2009 22:08:31

P.S. Incidentally, Laura, I winced at your claim, "White Americans do not understand such comments within their racial and historical context."

It's one thing to say one can't completely feel what another feels or know the experiences of another. It's quite another to exclude an entire race from being able to understand the racial and historical context of another's behavior. You, apparently, feel as though you (a White American) can understand the comments well enough within their historical context to pass judgment on both the parties involved. And if you were to say, "African-Americans [--not Gates, but ALL African-Americans] can't understand such challenges to authority in their historical context..." I think people would have been all over you.

You also quoted one person as saying:

"This was the supreme humiliation for Henry Louis Gates, because he has achieved a rarefied status and the considerations that are usually afforded to him went right out the window when the officer arrested him. In a minute, that cop erased all that Gates has had to work through to get where he is."

Don't really want to get into a long diatribe, so I'll just say that I think this statement, like the "White Americans do not understand" comment, is pretty tone deaf.

Bottom line--I don't know all the facts either. But my gut response is/was that it sounds like there was plenty of blame to go around on both sides.

 

Laura

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 09:00:12

Ken,

Good catch on my comments. I didn't mean what I wrote, precisely. A better way to express what I intended is, "Many white Americans..."

I have to push back a bit on your comment about "You, apparently, feel as though you (a White American) can understand the comments well enough within their historical context to pass judgment on both the parties involved."

(After all, I'm a wise Latina <grin>.)

But seriously, the implication of my blog is exactly what your conclusion was: It sounds like there was plenty of blame to go around on both sides.

Not so sure that qualifies as "passing judgment" in quite as negative a fashion as your comments implied.

And I completely disagree with your comment about the quote being tone deaf. I found it to be an excellent summary of what one feels when faced with (what appears to be) prejudice after having fought a long battle to establish oneself outside the "limitations" of race, gender or sexual orientation.

Your mileage may vary, of course. That's the beauty of discourse.

 

Laura

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 09:13:16

Ken...

This is what I get for writing responses in reverse order. My question about this being "scripted theater" is what Obama would possibly have to gain by it.

Given his overwhelming support at the polls by African Americans, I don't think he needs (as Steve put it) to "establish his bona fides as an authentic black man."

Obama's restatements have certainly not won him much forgiveness from the police, their supporters (or those who post racist comments about him on YouTube).

I think it was exactly what it appeared to be: an off the cuff comment, couched in disclaimers, about a situation that involved a friend (a situation in which most of us would overlay our knowledge of the friend and factor in some assumptions that may prove false).

 

Laura

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 09:39:45

Steve,

You're not gangsta, no matter how hard you try. <grin> With that said, a couple of points:

The dozens is not, as you indicated, exclusively played with friends. In fact, it often comes into play to establish position in new social contexts (and by that, I am not exclusively referring to friendly get togethers but using "new social contexts" to indicate the broader swath of situations where people meet other people for the first time).

As to the long history of disproportionate (in)justice, all one needs to do is look at our prison populations for evidence. http://www.swivel.com/graphs/show/5145666 Comparing prison demographics to general population demographics; black people are 39.5% of prisoners while having on 12% of our general population. Hispanics are 20.2% of the prison population versus 15% of general pop. And whites? 34.6% of prisoners while a whopping 67% of the population (all these are 2005 numbers).

Some may argue that this is not indicative of a disparity in profiling, sentencing, or criminalization...but even if so, it certainly would feel to a member of the over-represented races like racial discrimination.

Likewise, you seem to think that we exist in a vacuum in the present, where past history of slavery, Jim Crow, etc., belong neatly in the past. Taking another group as a metaphor, many of our Jewish bretheren (and sisteren) certainly frame their current context given the historical persecution they've received. I don't believe that history remains neatly in a box while we go about our current lives.

Incidentally, do you know that the kids in your "lily white enclave" do not experience racial prejudice from talking to them? Or is your opinion based on the fact that they are granted access to both the housing development and the school?

What about those who are not granted access? Do they also go through life without prejudice based on the color of their skin?

I'm glad that you wouldn't be treated like Gates. That you would be able to hold your temper after being treated as a criminal in your own home. I don't believe I would be as level headed as you in that situation...and am not surprised that Gates was similarly emotional.

As for the "neighbor," it's unfortunate that she didn't recognize one of the "big black men" as her neighbor, the smallish Professor Gates.

But that wouldn't be racial at all, eh?

 

Laura

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 09:41:33

Thanks, Mom. I'm on my way.

 

Steven Peden

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 10:54:03

Laura,

I know for a fact you are not ignorant enough to think correlation = causation, so your remark that "all one needs to do is look at our prison populations for evidence" I will chalk up to you (unusually for you - I normally expect more thoughtfulness from you) parroting the PC liberal talking points. Umm . . . disproportionate black inmate populations result from disproportionate commission of crimes by blacks, particularly young black men. PERIOD. The ENTIRE statistical discrepancy is accounted for by crime rates (yes, there is SOME evidence that blacks receive higher sentences for "the same crime," but apparently most, if not all, of this discrepancy goes away when you factor in surrounding circumstances, ability/tendency to assist in your own defense, etc.). Now, you can propound any theory you want about the WHY of this, but don't pretend the FACT doesn't exist. Blacks are NOT treated disproportionately, in our criminal justice system, to whites.

As for my street bona fides - no, I am no more "gangsta" than you (though I would suggest that my time spent in poverty and/or as a racial minority in rough neighborhoods may equal or exceed yours - remember, I put myself through college and law school on part-time jobs. Lived as the ONLY white in a Latino neighborhood, right on the edge of a black neighborhood, in Denver for nearly three years - on $100/month above my rent and utilities.) You can make all the sociological comments you want about "playing the dozens," I'm telling you street truth - you walk up to some guy you don't know in the 'hood, and try to "establish your place" by slagging his momma, you're going to get yourself knocked the **** out. Period. It CAN be, in the right context, a sort of non-violent but verbally agressive competition of sorts, but in ANY other context, it is calling someone out. Gates was NOT in any context where his remark
was anything other than an overt effort to get in the cop's face, as agressively as possible.

And I agree that Obama's comment was "political theater" - performed badly. He has proven himself tone deaf in the extreme on these issues - as PROVEN by the fact that he has now had to PERSONALLY walk his comments back, not once, but twice, and sent his little talking gerbil, GIbbs, out to do it two more times. He even has his unofficial talking gerbil, Stephanopolous, carrying water for him on the talking heads shows. If it was such a brilliantly scripted bit of political commentary, why is he scrambling around like a cat trying to cover $hit on a linoleum floor, and making an even BIGGER ass of himself?????????

 

Steven Peden

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:53:01

Oh, and Ken - I might get treated differently by cops for a lot of reasons???

I've BEEN beaten up by a cop before, in a situation where I had been NOTHING but cooperative and polite. He pulled me over at 3 am in Hollywood, certain he had a solid DUI bust (I hadn't had a drop). He roughed me up getting me out of my car and searching me, then got REALLY pissed when I passed the field sobriety test with flying colors, and responded by bouncing me off of his squad car 3 or 4 times -HARD. I had bruises for days. Don't know what the problem was - bad day, fight with his girlfriend, got chewed out by his boss, whatever. He just was pissed at me, and no amount of "yes, officer" and "no, officer" would calm him down. After they turned me loose, his partner hustled him back into his squad car, came over to me and asked me if I wanted him to call a field supervisor to make a complaint - against his own partner, so HE knew how far out of line the guy was. I thanked him, and asked him to get his partner off the street before someone got hurt, and went on my way. I could have complained - I CERTAINLY had grounds - but cops have a dirty, nasty, dangerous job, and they are only human. Oh, the cops? The guy who roughed me up was white, his partner was a "wise Latino."

My brother, contrariwise, has had the pluperfect crap beaten out of him by cops more times than I can count. Blond hair, blue eyes, 6'2" and 225, he's as white as they come. He's also a TOTAL horse's ass, and smarts off to cops all the time, as well as behaving aggressively. Frankly, I'd beat his ass up, too.

Pretty much, folks, you treat the cops with a modicum of respect and courtesy, and you will be OK, 999 times out of 1,000 (my DUI stop was a real anomoly - I've told police friends about it who were very much taken aback, and told me I SHOULD have complained).

Gates provoked an incident, and is trying to make hay out of his own @$$holiness. Obama jumped into a politically-charged situation, without, IN HIS OWN WORDS, any knowledge of the facts, and stuck both feet well and truly in his mouth. As witness the aftermath, and his administrations scrambling and incompetent attempts to recover from it.

But spin all you want trying to cover for him - just don't get too dizzy.

 

Cynthia Siler

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:01:11

Laura,

As you know I don't normally comment on your political writings/musings but on this one I have an opinion.

I watched President Obama's speech to the nation on Wednesday evening in its entirety and found his comments regarding the Professor Gates incident to be curious at the time. He took great pains to communicate that he didn't have all the facts but then went on to give his uninformed opinion on the incident as his answer to the question he was posed on the state of race relations in our country.

People with a little wisdom know that to give an opinion on a matter without having all the facts, especially the leader of the free world in a televised speech, are asking for trouble. ALL politicians in this day and age know the line "no comment" or at least he could have asked to reserve his comments for a later date once the investigation into the incident was complete.

He "stepped in it" and a true apology for his comments are in order. THAT would go a long way in correcting this situation. I am glad he called the officer but I personally am not appeased by the call alone. He blew it and should apologize for making hasty comments. If his comment was "political theatre" he should have at least mentioned the mood of Professor Gates in his restatement of the facts. Without that fact he made the police officer out to be a white thug out to arrest a black man. He either chose to leave that out or, as I think, he just didn't know at the time and screwed up big time in leaving that important piece of information out.

Funny how the reason for that press conference is now lost on all of us due to his careless words. Shouldn't we all be talking about his plan for health care reform about now?

 

Laura

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 21:20:00

Steve:

There are a number of studies that show that black neighborhoods are more highly policed, that blacks are more likely to receive a death sentance for capital crimes than whites are...heck, even that doing drugs while poor is a worse offense (sentencing-wise) than doing drugs while wealthy (crack versus coke: which had a disproportionate impact on black incarcerations).

I may be drawing conclusions based on studies and correlations...but you are positing a tautology: more blacks are in prison thereby proving more blacks commit crimes.

Having grown up in a lower middle-class neighborhood, mostly white, lightly policed, I know several individuals (some of whom were/are family members) who would have been arrested for things they did (including disorderly conduct) if they'd done the same things in a minority/poor/highly policed neighborhood.

So you can't convince me that prison populations are proof that there is no inequity in arrests and sentencing simply by the fact that they exist. Show me some data about arrests and crimes, weighted by police presence...then we can talk.

(It doesn't exist, as far as I can tell, on the web.)

You said the dozens in the right context CAN be a proxy for a pissing contest. I'm thinking that one might feel comfortable enough in one's own home to engage in a pissing contest. Especially when one is used to being treated with the respect due an internationally recognized professor.

And by the way (it's switching points slightly, but you do that all the time, so I figure I can)...since when is disorderly conduct a crime in a private home? As far as I can tell, disordely conduct is offensive behavior (hence "conduct") in a public area that results in a public nuisance.

I did, however, find one point of agreement in your reply to me. I am not, nor will I ever be, gangsta.

 

Laura

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 21:35:14

Cyndi!

Glad to read your comments. I did not watch the entire press conference, so I didn't evaluate it in the greater context. I'll have to get back to you on that point.

I think the question that was asked specified both the particular situation and the reflection it might have on race relations in our country.

Obama's sort of damned if he does, damned if he doesn't in this sort of situation. If he'd asked for more time to explore the facts, or said that it was a matter for local government to figure out--well, he'd be lambasted by the left as dodging the question and taunted by the right about his being an "inauthentic" black man.

If he speaks out, as he did...even given his disclaimers...people jump on his comment as either planned political theater or horrible misjudgement. (I think even most of his critics would agree that it wasn't both.)

He did, as you say, "step in it" by making the choice to address the question without first having all the facts. And I'm sure he regrets having said "stupidly."

However, I think there's an argument to be made that the police officer AND Gates acted stupidly. I'm pretty sure that's what Obama meant when he said cooler heads might have prevailed.

As a result, I'm not sure he should apologize to the police officer any more than he's already done. If the officer's decision had been "intelligent," the charges would not have been dropped.

I do agree, however, that when one steps up to the podium and gives an opinion (whether one has all the facts or not), there is an expectation of fallout especially when talking about an issue as controversial as race and policing in the U.S.

And I do note that it's pulled focus from health care...so I better watch the rest of the press conference so I can get up to speed on the issue.

Frankly, given what else has been on my plate, I haven't really been jazzed to do the work to investigate and have a reasonably informed opinion.

Maybe I should just say "no comment?"

<smile>


 

Kenneth R. Morefield

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 08:42:49

Steve, what a horrible experience. I'm sorry to hear you had to go through that. Thanks for your willingness to share.

I'm a bit confused at what looks like cross purposes in your messages. In the first, you say that this would not happen to you because you would not mouth off to police. But then you relate in experience about how it DID happen to you even though you did nothing wrong. Not trying to be flip, just saying I'm not tracking your argument here.

Laura, according to Soledad O'Brien on CNN, you cannot be arrested for disorderly conduct in your own home. Some apparently feel this is why the officer asked Mr. Gates to step out of the house. This could be evidence of forethought on the policeman's part, but I can imagine several scenarios where it played out differently. It is a part of the story that seems ambiguous, and is easily lost in the telephone game of reporting of what happened.

The second quote in your first message seems off to me for chronological reasons. That is, what is described as a supreme humiliation (I assume, the arrest) appears to me to be given as a justification for the actions that led to it (yeah, he was aggressive and hostile, but give him a break, he was subject to the supreme humiliation). I also find the words "supreme" and "all" problematic.

Earlier today I ran across this piece I wrote about "Waltz With Bashir" (http://kenmorefield.blogspot.com/2009/03/waltz-with-bashir-2008.html). In it I wrote: "Not all acts of violence are created equal. Got it. So why do we (by which I mean 'human beings' not necessary Jews, Christians, Arabs, or Atheists) cling so hard to the double standard that insists that everything we do is mitigated by history and context but everything done to us must be accounted for on a scale of moral absolutes?"

Honestly, that's what this conversation feels like to me. I hear you saying both were wrong BUT Gates should get a pass for his behavior because of history and context while the police officer should be judged by a more demanding scale. Perhaps this is right (police should be held to a higher standard, irrespective of race), but there seems to be such a rush to judgment, that I haven't heard a lot of specifics about how and where that standard wasn't met--only generalizations, rehearsals of past grievances, and speculation.

 

Laura

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:40:02

Ken,

I am not saying, as you inferred, that Gates should get a pass on his behavior. Nor should Crowly. I believe both were in error and both have some responsibility for the situation. Is it 50/50, 60/40? I don't know.

I can understand how it might feel that I "sided" with Gates to some readers. I did spend more time on what might have led to his behavior than I did on Crowly. So perhaps the number of words could lead some to believe I found all the fault with the officer and none with Gates...but it's certainly not how I read it...and definitely not what I meant to say.

Why do you find the words "supreme" and "all" problematic? Because they aren't Gates's words? Or because they seem hyperbolic to you?

To me, it seemed apt because I have been in situations where it *felt* like all I have tried to be is ignored or discounted by a man due to my gender. In those moments of loss, frustration and referred powerlessness, I could easily have described it as a supreme humiliation.

That's why the quote seemed worth including...especially as an insight from an African American writer.

As to the chronology, I see what you're saying about humiliation now not justifying behavior, even in the recent past. But it seems to me the humiliation began with being assumed to be a thief in one's own home, having to provide documentation of the same, etc. Obviously, neither of us know the chronology...but if I were writing it as a scene, I would see it as a series of flashpoinhts for both Crowly and Gates rather than merely the humiliation of the arrest.

As to what impacted Crowly's behavior, I can reel off a few things I've learned from police friends. Adrenaline is up when you enter a situation where someone's said there is a burglary taking place. Cops are used to deference and when they don't get it, it can often be a trigger point. It's even possible that, due to Crowly's history as a trainer in how to avoid racist behaviors, he took greater offense at any accusations of racism that Gates may have said or implied.

To your Bashir quote (gotta see that film) I don't believe that everything done to me should be punished in terms of moral absolutes while I get a pass due to my history. Nor do I think that such a rule should apply (or does apply) to human beings. I do recognize it as an instinct of humans...hence, people magnify and harbor the wrongs done to them and minimize their own wrongdoing. I think a good part of our human tendency to do so comes from our limited points of view. I feel my pain. But I don't feel yours. The best I can do is try to understand your injuries as a fellow human being.

Lastly, my take on how the standard of appropriate choices on Crowly's part weren't met comes from the arrest, the dropped charges and the fact that such a charge was flimsy in the first place (due to what you pointed out and I had confirmed about disorderly conduct).

 

Steven Peden

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 14:35:29

Ken,

Fair question, and, yes, my ONE bad experience with the cops does (somewhat) contradict my main point, which was - IF you behave like a calm, mature, rational adult around cops, it is HIGHLY unlikely that you are going to be mistreated, REGARDLESS of your color. My smaller point (which I was trying to use my bad experience to illustrate) is that there are instances of police misconduct that affect EVERYONE - white, black or otherwise. Police are humans, and therefore flawed. My larger point remains, I believe, true - you treat cops with respect, and you aren't going to get roughed up, except in VERY unusual circumstances (and mine were so unusual, the guy's own partner tried to get me to make a complaint).

Laura, you are correct, I am unaware of any study that correlates arrest rates by ethnicity of neighborhood combined with police presence - and yet you ASSUME racism. Interesting, that.

I DID NOT say that more blacks in prison proved more blacks commit crimes. I said, and I can prove (by reported crimes, not arrests) that blacks commit crimes HIGHLY disproportionately to whites, Hispanics, Asians, or any other ethnic group (and, since the most common crimes committed by blacks are "black on black" crime, and blacks are known to underreport crimes, we can reasonably posit that the REAL numbers are even more disproportionate).

You can make assumptions about what arrest stats "might be" if more cops patrolled white neighborhoods, but that would be ignoring an econo-political truth that would seem (to me) too obvious to overlook - more cops patrol black neighborhoods because those are the neighborhoods where most of the crime is committed. Duh.

Sorry, kid, but your automatic assumption of American racism is not supported by anything. And the truth is, if you will go talk to, for instance, "ethnic" Muslim or African immigrants in France, Belgium, or even the UK, Europe is FAR more racist than is the US. The old trope about Europe's "open-mindedness" about race arose at a time when EUROPE HAD NO ETHNIC DIVERSITY TO SPEAK OF. America is, and has been for over a century, THE MOST ETHNICALLY AND RACIALLY DIVERSE SOCIETY ON EARTH.

And we have done more and accomplished more than any other society on earth to achieve racial harmony. That you, and liberals in general, insist on pulling the scab off of our worst problems IN OUR PAST, pointing to the oozing wound you just de-scabbed, and yelling "SEE!!!! RACISM!!!" Umm - that don't make it true.

And, yes, I DO talk to Connor's black friends about their treatment - because, unlike our President, if I don't have the facts, I tend not to shoot my mouth off.

Gates being asked onto the porch is standard police procedure - in case there is an armed intruder in the house. He was arrested on his porch because, in the words of the SEVERAL officers on the scene at that point (and at least two witnesses whose statements have been summarized in the press) Gates was being belligerent, shouting, verbally assaulting the officer, and wouldn't calm down. I would say he got what was coming to him, but the cop DIDN'T punch him out, so, as far as I'm concerned, he skated. Obama, in the words of Jacques Chirac, "missed an excellent opportunity to stay silent." But, then, he usually does.

 

Kenneth R. Morefield

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:53:33

Steve, thanks for the clarification.

Laura, I agree that the fact that the charges were dropped (and quickly) is telling. But so is the fact that the officer was not made to apologize (as I suspect he would be if there were a serious breach or fear of a justified complaint).

I still think everyone got what they wanted. Gates gets a broader platform from which to trumpet his issues. The police get an apology from a high-profile African-American (who cares for what!), and Obama gets to express solidarity with the Black experience without alienating liberal whites (as represented by the Harvard community). But color me cynical, I guess.

 

Laura

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 15:56:21

Had to laugh at the last line, Steve, since we all miss excellent opportunities to stay silent. Most of us are not on camera 24/7, though, so we get away with our hyperbole, overstatements and assumptions a little bit easier than world leaders.

However, to your point that I assume racism...

I admit that racism is PART of the overall picture (not all of it). There are significant socio-economic forces at play, too, in the crime stats.

Not to tear off any scabs here, but part of the reason for socio-economic disparities has to do with our history. It takes a while for a subset of society to go from slaves, to despised and feared, to fully participative in a society. (Please note that I'm talking about a set of people, not individuals.)

"disproportionate black inmate populations result from disproportionate commission of crimes by blacks, particularly young black men. PERIOD"

Okay, so you didn't use the word, proof...but it sure sounds like you were inferring that black prison population is only the result of more crime by blacks...regardless of studies that show bias in sentencing.

And while I believe that we've made tremendous progress in race relations in the U.S., I don't see the present in a vacuum, separated from the past. That would be as naive as telling you that your reference to your own past history with policemen is not relevant to your opinion of how they should and should not behave...that your financial status as a youth didn't and shouldn't impact your politics now.

I'm glad you talk to Connor's black friends about their experience. At the same time, it's important to remember that there are completely different experiences of race in other parts of the country, state, city, etc.

As to who is to blame more in the Gates/Crowly/Obama fiasco, it seems as usual that we will agree to disagree.

 

Steven Peden

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:14:27

Again, the standard liberal talking points about "societal" factors. Riddle me this - In the late 40's and early 50's, when even LIBERALS would agree that societal, institutional racism was FAR worse than it is now, why were black:

1. Incarceration rates not significantly higher than whites, particularly when adjusted for socio-economic factors (takes a while to get to this, but stick with it and you'll eventually get the stats)?

2. Black unwed pregnancy rates virtually equal to those of whites?

3. Black nuclear families remaining intact at, again, virtually the same rates as whites?

Hmm. Societal factors, eh??? Like, maybe, welfare, destruction of the black nuclear family, etc.????? THOSE societal factors??????

Family structure, per 20 of 22 studies on the issue, almost entirely explains disparate crime statistics (See http://www.marriagedebate.com/pdf/imapp.crimefamstructure.pdf) and I find this analysis a rather persuasive explanation of how we got to this sorry pass: (http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-wc67.html). All due to "white racism" and the difficulty of blacks making the transition from slavery and "second-class citizenship" to full participation in the American body politic and economy? Not so much - and why were the statistics (until welfare reform, mirabile dictu) trending the WRONG way?????

Yep, definitely blame us racist, uncaring whites, and the racist American system. May not have any basis in FACT, but it fits the PC narrative.

 

Kenneth R. Morefield

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:32:48

Couple of late notes:

--Smoking Gun has printed a copy of the police reports. (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates1.html)

--Slate has weighed in on their weekly podcast, almost entirely on Gates's side, with several of the participants conceding they know Gates personally and calling the police report (reprinted at above link) "obvious lies."

--I note that the second officer's statement was from someone who, by last name, appears to be Hispanic.

--I'm confused by page 2 of the report as to when the officer entered the home.

--FWIW, I find the report credible. (Not saying it is truthful, just saying I find it believable.)

--Were I on some sort of jury, it would be significant to me that the citizen that called in the complaint met the officer at the door. This would suggest to me that there was a witness to at least the beginnings of the interaction. This makes it harder for me to believe that there was obvious misconduct from the get go. It also strikes me as a plausible factor for why the police officer might act more assertively than otherwise in that I can see a legitimate concern for gaining control of the situation, which would be subverted by Gates's refusal to say whether or not there was anyone else in the house and to (initially) provide identification. Were I police officer and I got a call about two suspects, I would be extremely wary until I could check the premises, particularly if someone were not acting in a way I expect and/or am used to. I'm not saying I would jump to specific conclusions, but I could see how his "spider-sense" would be saying "something weird is going on here."

Of course, that depends on your willingness to believe Gates could be belligerent from the get go. Fwiw, last year we got incident training about what to do if there were a school shooting/attack. One point that was stressed over and over is that when you see police, remember they don't know who you are, so don't rush towards them, do show your hands, and understand their primary concern is going to be to locate the/any potential threat(s), so that is not the time to engage them in long accounts of what has happened.

 



Leave a Reply