I've noticed that the same people on my newsfeed who claim that the police's actions in Ferguson and NYC were justified due to the fact that Eric Garner and Michael Brown were under investigation for breaking the law are the same ones that complain about the police on campus when they partake in underage drinking. Eric Garner was arrested on charges of selling cigarettes illegally but that did not constitute the violent force used in his restraining. I hope those that declare the actions of the officers in these cases as valid solely on the premise of laws being broken have never committed a crime themselves, since apparently the magnitude of the crime is of no significance or relevance. Ever hear the saying," people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones?" I think I like outkast's version of the saying better. Please, stop claiming moral superiority because hypocrisy isn't a good look on anyone.
I may be making assumptions here, but I feel like some of the people that are supporting the police's actions in these cases, would not feel that they are at risk of being killed over a seemingly petty crime such as underage drinking. From a legal and societal perspective underage drinking is not a harmless crime, it can be very dangerous to society and those that partake in it. However you may fear arrest for such a crime, but would you fear your life ? Probably not, that's privilege. The people who fear for their lives are the people whose bodies have been criminalized or are considered threatening by the system. The ones most vulnerable to police abuse are ones who have less political efficacy in society. With an institution that has so much power, those who are minorities can be like ants under a magnifying glass unless proper measures to reform the system are taken. I do agree that the punishment should fit the crime. So what's the punishment for taking a man's life under the same system that apparently constitutes violent force for the selling of illegal cigarettes? Well according to a grand jury, nothing.
Speaking of moral superiority, just because one claims to not want to talk about race because it is "divisive" does not make them progressive. Progress is listening to people of color when they speak about their experiences, not to deny their claims because you think we live in a post-racial society. It is literally as absurd as the mansplainer on CNN that butted heads with Amanda Seales, because he as a man asserted that he knew more about the street harassment of women . Do not try to tell a marginalized group what it's really like for them, that is sexism and racism.
Yes I know we shudder at the harshness of the R word, but it doesn't mean that it isn't true. Racism isn't what it used to be sixty years ago with people shouting, " I hate people of color," yet when you make generalizations and assumptions regarding a group of people, sorry to tell you but you are racist. An example is the topic of Black on Black crime. The problem with the topic of Black on Black crime is much like the topic of extremism in Pakistan. The West is quick to point out the rise of extremism in Pakistan in recent years, yet refuses to acknowledge their part in causing this extremism. When drone strikes are common, civilians are often the ones killed. This is an environment that breeds terrorism and anti-Western sentiment because innocents are being killed. The same occurs when the media talks about Black on Black crime, what the media is trying to say is, "look they are just violent humans who bring this upon themselves." Wrong, that is literally victim blaming. The argument this is trying to make is that it is a culture problem, which it is. However, it is not a "black culture" problem like it is being framed. The problem is the culture of hate, disenfranchisement and institutionalized racism present in the United States. Let's stop looking at the symptoms of the disease and actually acknowledge what is causing it and what part our system plays in it. No group asks for violence to be committed against them, so stop assuming a group is just violent or irresponsible and thus purposely creating problems for itself. This may come as shock to many, but there is no "violent" "irresponsible" gene found solely in People of Color that just isn't present in White people.
*Disclaimer: I identify as a person of color but I am not Black and do not wish to adopt the struggle as my own. I would never want to control the Black narrative or speak on behalf of all People of Color. As a woman of color and immigrant, who is also Muslim I face my own struggles but do not claim to own the struggle of those who are Black, but I did want to write on a topic that I feel very passionately about as a form of solidarity. I simply write my views on the topic and am open to critical dialogue.
P.S. How can an armed cop with 4 armed cops as back up feel threatened when arresting an unarmed civilian? Beats me.
P.P.S. The chokehold used on Garner was banned by the NYPD in 1993, although it is technically still legal. The NYPD made the ban, so why wasn't there any consequence for an officer that challenged the ban? Lack of accountability and consequences for the actions of cops are a danger to all civilians.
P.S. How can an armed cop with 4 armed cops as back up feel threatened when arresting an unarmed civilian? Beats me.
P.P.S. The chokehold used on Garner was banned by the NYPD in 1993, although it is technically still legal. The NYPD made the ban, so why wasn't there any consequence for an officer that challenged the ban? Lack of accountability and consequences for the actions of cops are a danger to all civilians.