Since the Staten Island grand jury refused to indict officer Pantaleo for being catalyst to Eric Garner's death, Americans have been left to wonder what to make of it all. As with any senseless death, people want to know exactly what it all means. To radical leftists, Eric Garner signifies yet another example of America's intrinsic racism. The more rational minded right have found themselves more divided. While Eric Garner's death should be no cause for mass hysteria or some great indictment of our corrupt system, there are some lessons to be learned, some scarier than we'd like to admit.
Should Eric Garner have been more compliant with the officers? Absolutely. Did his previous medical condition play a major role in his death? The evidence suggests so. Should the cops have escalated it to the level of physical altercations? Not against an unarmed, non-violent offender to enforce what can only be described as a ludicrous law. Should the grand jury have indicted? For murder and manslaughter: no; reckless endangerment seems more appropriate considering how much his medical condition contributed to his death. That, of course, is an assessment based on the visible evidence. Once the grand jury's rationale becomes clearer to the public, these conclusions are subject to change.
A lot of talk has been made about if the officer's takedown had happened without Eric Garner's asthma, diabetes, and obesity contributing to his death, would this case had ever become as big a deal in the first place? Most likely not, but having watched the video multiple times, the most infuriating moment comes not when Eric Garner shouts "I can't breathe" as the officers cuff him, but when Officer Pantaleo wraps Garner from behind and wrestles him down. The question lingers...why? Why put your life in danger, Garner's life in danger, and the lives of your fellow officer's in danger for something so petty as cigarettes? What if Garner had not died and just broken a rib or an ankle? What if the storefront window had buckled, as Pantaleo said he feared for in his testimony, and their bodies careened through the glass? Garner made no physical threats and committed no violent crime. The cops brought violence into a situation where it didn't need to exist and the disturbing, underlying subtext to that reality shouldn't be swept under a rug.
Look, police provide an indispensable service to our society. That truth cannot be lost here. As Charles Barkley said, our neighborhoods would be the "wild, wild west" without them risking their lives everyday to ensure our safety. The people hijacking this case as a vehicle for them to spit on cops in hopes to remedy their self-loathing racism (leftists) or advance their anarchistic philosophies (hard libertarians) have taken this too far. All Americans should show gratitude and respect to the police, because some of those police die in service of our safety.
But let's be completely honest here, the police walk a tight-rope between servicing the people of their communities and servicing the governments of their communities. They have the potential to be our knightly defenders or the military arm to our local governments. Leftists from Jon Stewart to Jeffrey Toobin have mercilessly attacked Senator Rand Paul for saying Garner's death had been indirectly caused by the ridiculous New York City law that gave police license to arrest vendors of untaxed cigarettes. Salon even called him "borderline sociopathic." Could it be they just don't like acknowledging that all those big taxes, extensive regulation, meandering laws, and heavy fines they love to impose upon us for the "greater good" ultimately must be enforced out of the barrel of a police officer's gun? This, in no way, minimizes the officers' excessive force towards Garner, there will be no left-wing "the devil made them do it" scapegoats here, but when the government says to "arrest" people for selling untaxed cigarettes, they, in essence, give police officers license to meet an abstract, non-violent crime with physical force, and when those collide, confusion and violence can ensue.
We're living in an age where a business can be shut down for refusing to service a same-sex wedding, where a mayor can issue subpoenas on pastors' sermons, where you must buy health insurance or be subject to a fine, where schools have banned bibles in classrooms, where nuns are forced to pay for contraception, where doctors could be forced to perform abortions or assisted suicide, where the NSA can spy on our phone calls and emails, where the IRS can oppress your political views, where city employees can be suspended and forced to undergo sensitivity training for their Christian views, and where an unelected judge stands as the only barrier between us and freedom. When the slam of a judges' gavel becomes the divider that splits Americans between the right or wrong side of history, just remember, it will be the police they use to keep us "dissidents" in line.
"The police walk a tight-rope between servicing the people of their communities and servicing the governments of their communities."
Since the Staten Island grand jury refused to indict officer Pantaleo for being catalyst to Eric Garner's death, Americans have been left to wonder what to make of it all. As with any senseless death, people want to know exactly what it all means. To radical leftists, Eric Garner signifies yet another example of America's intrinsic racism. The more rational minded right have found themselves more divided. While Eric Garner's death should be no cause for mass hysteria or some great indictment of our corrupt system, there are some lessons to be learned, some scarier than we'd like to admit.
Should Eric Garner have been more compliant with the officers? Absolutely. Did his previous medical condition play a major role in his death? The evidence suggests so. Should the cops have escalated it to the level of physical altercations? Not against an unarmed, non-violent offender to enforce what can only be described as a ludicrous law. Should the grand jury have indicted? For murder and manslaughter: no; reckless endangerment seems more appropriate considering how much his medical condition contributed to his death. That, of course, is an assessment based on the visible evidence. Once the grand jury's rationale becomes clearer to the public, these conclusions are subject to change.
A lot of talk has been made about if the officer's takedown had happened without Eric Garner's asthma, diabetes, and obesity contributing to his death, would this case had ever become as big a deal in the first place? Most likely not, but having watched the video multiple times, the most infuriating moment comes not when Eric Garner shouts "I can't breathe" as the officers cuff him, but when Officer Pantaleo wraps Garner from behind and wrestles him down. The question lingers...why? Why put your life in danger, Garner's life in danger, and the lives of your fellow officer's in danger for something so petty as cigarettes? What if Garner had not died and just broken a rib or an ankle? What if the storefront window had buckled, as Pantaleo said he feared for in his testimony, and their bodies careened through the glass? Garner made no physical threats and committed no violent crime. The cops brought violence into a situation where it didn't need to exist and the disturbing, underlying subtext to that reality shouldn't be swept under a rug.
Look, police provide an indispensable service to our society. That truth cannot be lost here. As Charles Barkley said, our neighborhoods would be the "wild, wild west" without them risking their lives everyday to ensure our safety. The people hijacking this case as a vehicle for them to spit on cops in hopes to remedy their self-loathing racism (leftists) or advance their anarchistic philosophies (hard libertarians) have taken this too far. All Americans should show gratitude and respect to the police, because some of those police die in service of our safety.
But let's be completely honest here, the police walk a tight-rope between servicing the people of their communities and servicing the governments of their communities. They have the potential to be our knightly defenders or the military arm to our local governments. Leftists from Jon Stewart to Jeffrey Toobin have mercilessly attacked Senator Rand Paul for saying Garner's death had been indirectly caused by the ridiculous New York City law that gave police license to arrest vendors of untaxed cigarettes. Salon even called him "borderline sociopathic." Could it be they just don't like acknowledging that all those big taxes, extensive regulation, meandering laws, and heavy fines they love to impose upon us for the "greater good" ultimately must be enforced out of the barrel of a police officer's gun? This, in no way, minimizes the officers' excessive force towards Garner, there will be no left-wing "the devil made them do it" scapegoats here, but when the government says to "arrest" people for selling untaxed cigarettes, they, in essence, give police officers license to meet an abstract, non-violent crime with physical force, and when those collide, confusion and violence can ensue.
We're living in an age where a business can be shut down for refusing to service a same-sex wedding, where a mayor can issue subpoenas on pastors' sermons, where you must buy health insurance or be subject to a fine, where schools have banned bibles in classrooms, where nuns are forced to pay for contraception, where doctors could be forced to perform abortions or assisted suicide, where the NSA can spy on our phone calls and emails, where the IRS can oppress your political views, where city employees can be suspended and forced to undergo sensitivity training for their Christian views, and where an unelected judge stands as the only barrier between us and freedom. When the slam of a judges' gavel becomes the divider that splits Americans between the right or wrong side of history, just remember, it will be the police they use to keep us "dissidents" in line.
Issues
People