Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Is Criticizing Police a Crime Now?
Last
night President Obama
said he didn't know "what role race played" in last week's
arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates at his home in
Cambridge. But it's clear that race played an important role, if
only because Gates was convinced that Sgt. James Crowley, who came
to his house in response to an erroneous burglary report, would
have treated a white man less suspiciously and more
respectfully. By Gates' account, what really angered him is
that Crowley continued to question him even after he explained that
he had been forcing open a jammed door to his own house
and showed identification confirming that he lived there.
The main difference between the two men's versions of events is
that Crowley, who ended up handcuffing Gates and arresting him for
disorderly conduct (a charge that was dropped on Tuesday), portrays
Gates as more belligerent and louder than Gates portrays himself.
But even if we accept the facts as presented by Crowley, it's clear
he abused his authority, whether or not the color of Gates' skin
had anything to do with it.
Let's say Gates did initially refuse to show his ID (an unsurprising response from an innocent man confronted by police in his own home). Let's say he immediately accused Crowley of racism, raised his voice, and behaved in a "tumultuous" fashion. Let's say he overreacted. So what? By Crowley's own account, he arrested Gates for dissing him. That's not a crime, or at least it shouldn't be. Instead of admitting that he "acted stupidly" (as Obama put it) in the heat of the moment by deciding to punish Gates for hurting his feelings, Crowley continues to defend his conduct, refusing to apologize.
Over at National Review's blog, Jonah Goldberg reports that his reader email on this subject has been about evenly divided between those who "think Gates is hilariously in the wrong" and those who "think that the cop was transparently to blame for the whole mess." He says this split reflects a more general divide among Americans; some are "deferential to police" and "give cops the benefit of the doubt," while others are "inclined to distrust them" and "see them as potential abusers of authority." Goldberg puts himself in the first camp, while I fall into the second. But it seems to me you'd have to be awfully authoritarian to think that Gates owes Crowley an apology, as opposed to the other way around.
Yesterday Michael Moynihan reviewed some of the reaction to Gates' arrest.
kilroy|7.23.09 @ 12:55PM|#
Fucking-a-right! Screaming at a cop on your own private property should be a national pastime.
|7.23.09 @ 1:00PM|#
There hasn't been a rush of reports countering Officer Crowley's
account. If his report is even close to accurate, I believe that it
is Gates that was the the antagonizer.
If true that the officer gave his name multiple times and only
moved to arrest Gates after he continued the altercation outside
the home when the officer was leaving...so be it.
I don't think that it is or should be an arrestable offense but
this does not appear to be a matter of simple 'dissing' a cop.
|7.23.09 @ 1:00PM|#
Is a mutual apology in order? Seems like the officer crossed the
line, and Gates tried milking it for all it was worth.
Rooting for one side or the other seems pretty weak when neither
side has all that many redeeming qualities in the kerfluffle.
|7.23.09 @ 1:01PM|#
Indeed. In any event, the police officer admitted in his own report that he realized that Gates was the resident of the house long before he called backup and long before Gates walked on to the porch. At that point, what reason did the police officer have to remain on the premises? Breaking and entering could not have happened, and even "disorderly conduct" was impossible prior to the point at which Gates walked on to the porch. It's pretty clear -- even if you give the cop 100% credence -- that he remained on the property to address a perceived slight, which he ultimately did by arresting Mr. Gates. If that's not an abuse of power, I don't know what is. And if we can't criticize the cops without fear of arrest, we're all screwed.
Daniel|7.23.09 @ 1:02PM|#
Also, cries of "This is what happens to a black man in America!" rings rather hollow from a tenured professor at Harvard.
|7.23.09 @ 1:04PM|#
madmikefisk,
No, no mutual apology is in order. Gates may have been a jerk (it
sounds like he probably was a race baiting jerk), but that
was his right. The cop had no right to arrest him under false
pretenses. The end.
|7.23.09 @ 1:04PM|#
It continues to amaze and depress me the lengths people go in supporting their team. I can understand a "deferential to police" attitude. It's an attitude I've had myself, though time and experience has moved me into the "potential abusers of authority" camp. What I can't understand is how someone can be so wedded to giving deference to police that they still support them even when they've confessed to abusing authority.
|7.23.09 @ 1:04PM|#
I'm sick to death of all the cop-fellators. Their answer of
"well, just be nice to the cop and you won't have problems" is the
worst authority-loving bullshit ever. I don't care if Gates told
the cop that he fucked his mom in the ass last night; he was on his
property. I'm honestly surprised the pig didn't taser him.
The pigs grow increasingly thin-skinned. Normally I would say that
this is a result of them feeling that their authority is being
questioned more and more, but honestly it just seems like arrogance
at this point.
|7.23.09 @ 1:05PM|#
He should have been appreciative that the cop stopped by and checked on making sure that his house was not being broken into. If someone had called and the police did not show up you know he would have been screaming racism that the police don't respond to calls on homes owned by Afri-Amer's. You are a college professor..learn some manners. Hey btw, how did you get that job? Was it by your high scores in school? Or something else?
ktc2|7.23.09 @ 1:06PM|#
Mr. Sullum,
I'd recommend you read Radley's blog regularly. If you did you'd
know that not bowing and scraping obsequiously enough is the one
sure way to get yourself arrested or more likely assaulted and
tasered, then arrested.
It's as if the vast majority of our cops are oversized Eric
Cartmans spouting the "Respect my authoritah!" catch phrase.
|7.23.09 @ 1:10PM|#
WTF, yup if the cop had commented on Mr. Gates' manners we would have a completely different story. But that's not what happened. It's not news that some people lack appropriate manners -- leave that crap for Emily Post. This story is about an official abuse of power. It's minor compared to other abuses, but it's still saddening that so many people think that Gates deserved an arrest for being impolite to a polic officer.
|7.23.09 @ 1:13PM|#
And here they come. "Gates would scream racism if they didn't hassle him on his own property". You people are fucking pathetic. What chaps your ass more, the fact that he gave a pig some shit, or that he did it and is black?
|7.23.09 @ 1:15PM|#
Fuck the police!
(as a propositioned SWAT team breaks down my door in anticipation
of such a comment)
|7.23.09 @ 1:15PM|#
Peter Moskos, who sides with the cop, has a great post on this matter over at his blog, Cop in the Hood. Long story short, if a police officer ever asks you to talk about something "outside," it's a trick to nab you on a disorderly conduct charge. Stay right where you are and ask him to leave.
|7.23.09 @ 1:21PM|#
Chris S., my point is he should of acted appreciative and
civilized. If he was acting rude it is natural for people to get
upset when they are insulted. Let me demonstrate: You stupid
fucking brainless dumbshit. Don't you know how the world works? You
fucking crybaby, this isn't Oprah..go fill you diapers somewhere
else.
A Harvard professor should be smart enough to know that the cop was
just responding to a call and was actually doing him a favor
|7.23.09 @ 1:25PM|#
Don't worry, folks, when Internal Affairs reviews this incident, Mr. Crowley will be given a stiff reprimand and suspended.
Douglas Gray|7.23.09 @ 1:26PM|#
The cop did behave inappropriately, but it shows a lack of class
on Gates part to play the race card, and be such a whiny cry baby
about the whole thing. Obamas piling on is equally cheesy.
After reading the huge litany of police abuse cases in Radley
Balko's pieces over the last few years, this one is relatively
minor. The cop didn't kill a dog, frighten children or elderly
people, or really rough the guy up.
|7.23.09 @ 1:27PM|#
A Harvard professor should be smart enough to know that the
cop was just responding to a call and was actually doing him a
favor
Pathetic. It's a favor to be hassled in your own home? Could you be
any more of an asskisser? And it doesn't even matter--you have the
right to be a dick in your own home. But OH NOES, he dissed a pig,
and you just can't have that.
|7.23.09 @ 1:28PM|#
Crowley said he's grateful he has the support of his police
force. He said he's not worried about any possible disciplinary
action.
"There will be no apology," he said outside his home
Wednesday.
"Fuckin' little people."
|7.23.09 @ 1:28PM|#
"A Harvard professor should be smart enough to know that the cop
was just responding to a call and was actually doing him a
favor"
A cop ought to be professional enough to rise above an angry
billigerent home owner. Ultimately, Gates may have been wrong. But
he was within his rights. It is a free country. There is nothing
that says I can't call a cop who is in my house an asshole and be a
complete dick to him. As long as I am not threatening him or
assaulting him, the cop can either take it or get out of my
house.
To say that Gates was not within his rights and deserved to be
arrested is to say that cops deserve some kind of special reverence
not reserved for anyone else in society and that exists in spite of
the 1st Amendment. I am sorry but I can't buy that.
kilroy|7.23.09 @ 1:30PM|#
Can someone explain to me why stepping outside my door while
remaining on my own private property makes any difference?
This was a private residence with a front yard owned byt the same
party that owned the house. Stepping onto the side walk/road or
stepping out of an apartment/public housing into a common public
area might make some sense.
Why does it matter if it's in my house or in my
yard? I really don't get this.
|7.23.09 @ 1:30PM|#
if a police officer ever asks you to talk about something "outside," it's a trick to nab you on a disorderly conduct charge
Isn't that entrapment?
|7.23.09 @ 1:31PM|#
insisted he followed proper procedures in arresting Gates
last week on a charge of disorderly conduct. The charge was dropped
Tuesday.
Is the officer saying this on the advice of counsel to avoid being
sued? Because if an officer charges someone with disorderly
conduct, and the charge is subsequently dropped, that is an
indication that the officer should have considered walking away
from the provocation rather than making an arrest.
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 1:33PM|#
"What chaps your ass more, the fact that he gave a pig some
shit, or that he did it and is black?"
The latter. It sets back progress in race relations when folks like
gates pull this shit. And of course, that's exactly why he does it.
Racial harmony threatens his life's work.
MNG|7.23.09 @ 1:36PM|#
I agree with Epi's righteous anger here. This was not late at night, this was not some breach of the peace or disturbing the peace, there was not physical threat here, this was, being most deferential to the government official here (and might this non-libertarian note how strange it is to see so many libertarians being so deferential to the government rep here?) this was a man being angry with a cop ON HIS PORCH! It's crazy egregious to side with the cop here. Gates' motivation is frankly irrelevant. As John's well said comments above put it: Ultimately, Gates may have been wrong. But he was within his rights.
MNG|7.23.09 @ 1:38PM|#
I have to say, all I know of Gates is that I saw two PBS
specials he hosted where he used DNA and geneaology to look up his
roots and a CSPAN even on his book on Lincoln, and the guy did not
strike me as Al Sharpton with PhD...
I just saw him on headline news about five minutes ago and he said
nothing about race, he said "If this could happen to me it could
happen to anyone in America."
|7.23.09 @ 1:40PM|#
Can someone explain to me why stepping outside my door while
remaining on my own private property makes any
difference?
A lot of the time, people forget that they own far less property
than they actually do. About half of my front yard actually belongs
to the City and County of Honolulu, but the city owned part looks
just like the private part.
In any event, a proper respect for the First Amendment should make
it irrelevant whether you verbally dress down an officer on your
own property versus on the adjoining public property. If you
haven't committed a crime, you're supposed to have the right to
call police officers all the names you want, so long as you don't
touch them, but that part of the Bill of Rights got
unconstitutionally eviscerated long ago, thanks to Marbury versus
Madison and a slew of politicians pushing the envelope of what
powers the government is actually entitled to.
Zeb|7.23.09 @ 1:40PM|#
"In the future, the police should ignore calls to Gate's
house."
Why? Because it is more important that they not get their feelings
hurt than for them to actually do their job? Ass.
Space Fiend|7.23.09 @ 1:41PM|#
Isn't that entrapment?
All cops do these days is entrapment: fake hookers asking if you
want a good time, fake johns asking if they can have a good time,
fake drug dealers asking if you want a good time, fake drug buyers
asking if they can have a good time, fake hitmen asking if your
wife is having too good a time, fake postings for hitmen confirming
your wife is having too good a time, fake little girls online
asking if you want a good time.
Point is, cops hate good times.
Unrelated, but I don't understand how making a fake posting asking
for a hitman on craigslist and then arresting anyone who responds
is not the definition of entrapment.
|7.23.09 @ 1:41PM|#
It sets back progress in race relations when folks like
gates pull this shit. And of course, that's exactly why he does it.
Racial harmony threatens his life's work.
What colossal bullshit. It's telling how you completely skip over
the right to be a dick in one's own home and focus completely on
race.
hmm|7.23.09 @ 1:42PM|#
For the umteenth time. Who gives a shit if the guy is brown,
green, or blue. Who care what time it was. This all occurred on the
man's property. The most basic of rights, his fucking property.
Where can say any goddamn thing he wants. The officer was in the
wrong the minute he identified the man as the owner, he was no
longer there to protect and was there to serve. Serve himself right
the fuck off the mans property, regardless of what bad name the man
called him.
Gates was never wrong. He had every right to be angry if for
nothing more than the state's proxies were standing on his
property. I hope he was smart enough to tell them to leave as soon
as they identified him. Not that it matters.
If the officer refused to ID himself then feel free to add another
turd to the sandwich.
|7.23.09 @ 1:44PM|#
IN a radio interview, the officer says that the ID shown by
Gates was his Harvard faculty ID (no address).
Would it make any difference if there was a restraining order out
on an estranged spouse for domestic violence, and he was breaking
into a home he had the address of on his license because his wife
had change the locks?
If the police just leave when they see the matching address and the
guy lies in wait and later kills the spouse, are the police guilty
of negligence?
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 1:44PM|#
If he was acting rude it is natural for people to get upset
when they are insulted. Let me demonstrate: You stupid fucking
brainless dumbshit. Don't you know how the world works? You fucking
crybaby, this isn't Oprah..go fill you diapers somewhere
else.
I wouldn't dispute for a moment that Crowley should have felt
insulted.
It's the fact that he thinks he should be able to arrest people
when he feels insulted that makes me think he should be
fired from his 170k a year job.
|7.23.09 @ 1:45PM|#
kilroy,
As I understand it, "disorderly conduct" in Massachusetts requires
some form of "public" disruption. It's probably not possible to
satisfy this requirement for comments made from the inside of a
house (exceptionally loud music or disruptive noises from inside a
house may violate a different law or laws, but that isn't relevant
to this case). Comments made from a porch, while visible to members
of the public, may satisfy the public requirement to the
extent that you are seriously agitating members of the public, but
even this is a stretch. The reason why a police officer might lure
you out onto a porch is that it gives him an arguable (but
extremely weak) basis for stating that you were disturbing the
public. Even on the porch, the notion that a 58 year-old limping
professor could have been agitating the public by requesting that
the cop produce ID or by calling the cop a racist is laughable.
Gates' conduct would have had to been so egregious that it
literally threatened violence, a riot, etc., for the disorderly
conduct charge to stick. Of course, this is why the charge was
dropped: it was a joke - an excuse to annoy and harass a citizen
who dared to talk back to a cop.
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 1:45PM|#
"What colossal bullshit. It's telling how you completely skip
over the right to be a dick in one's own home and focus completely
on race."
Of colurse he has a right to be a dick in his own home. So do I.
But if I stand in my yard railing against black folk, Hispanics and
gays, well, that's not really helping anything or anyone.
Neu Mejican|7.23.09 @ 1:47PM|#
Hmmm...I think "acted stupidly" is a pretty good way to frame
it.
Police officer doing his job is verbally abused by homeowner
(homeowner is in the wrong, but within his rights as mentioned
above).
Police officer stops doing his job and decides to "win" an argument
= acted stupidly.
Unless Gates was creating a risk of harm to the police officer or
another citizen, he should have walked away as soon as he
established that no crime was being committed.
I seriously doubt there is anything additional to know about the
case that would place the police officer's actions outside of the
range of "stupid."
nebby|7.23.09 @ 1:47PM|#
"What colossal bullshit. It's telling how you completely skip
over the right to be a dick in one's own home and focus completely
on race."
Gates didn't say the cop was an asshole. He said he was a racist.
The police officer didn't mention race at all to Gates. Gates made
this about race by screaming at the cop trying to protect Gates
house.
|7.23.09 @ 1:48PM|#
tim,
Yes, that would make a difference, because then the cop might have
probable cause for believing that a crime was being committed. But
he didn't, so your hypothetical is meaningless.
If would have also made a difference if the house were on fire, if
Gates fired shots at the police, or if Gates fit the description of
a known murderer believed to be in the area. But then again, so
what?
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 1:49PM|#
"Gates didn't say the cop was an asshole. He said he was a
racist. The police officer didn't mention race at all to Gates.
Gates made this about race by screaming at the cop trying to
protect Gates house."
Thank you, nebby.
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 1:50PM|#
"Gates made this about race by screaming at the cop trying to
protect Gates house."
Because that's exactly what race-baiters do. It has a very Saul
Alinsky smell aboiut it.
|7.23.09 @ 1:51PM|#
"Gates didn't say the cop was an asshole. He said he was a
racist."
Gates does not have that power over us. Only we can make it about
race. You see, making it about race obscures the real abuse of
power.
Little Cartmans.
|7.23.09 @ 1:51PM|#
I look at this case and others like the one Hit and Run blogged
about the other day where the undercover drug cop shot the guy
trying to push him off his porch, and I see a trend. The trend is
that cops have this attitude that they are above everyone else and
have no obligation to take any shit off of anyone. If they don't
like you or your attitude they will just arrest you on trumped up
"disorderly conduct" or "disobeying and officer" charges. Yeah, the
charges will be dropped. But your day and perhaps reputation will
be ruined. You will have to go through the humiliation of being
arrested. And you will learn the lessen that no one can do anything
but kiss a cop's ass. The cop will suffer no consiquences for
falsly arresting you.
I am sorry, but I don't play that way. Cops are not above the law.
They are public servents. They get paid to take shit from the
public once in a while.
Federal Dog|7.23.09 @ 1:52PM|#
"By Gates' account, what really angered him is that Crowley
continued to question him even after he explained that he had been
forcing open a jammed door to his own house and showed
identification confirming that he lived there."
Cops always run a check on IDs during threshold inquiries, even if
the inquiry relates to a very minor civil motor vehicle infraction.
That check will always seek to verify the ID's authenticity.
No race is exempt from this practice, nor is it inconsistent with
constitutional standards governing threshold inquiries.
MNG|7.23.09 @ 1:52PM|#
It might matter what time of day it is, as the only
justification I can think of for criminalizing disorderly conduct
is that it basically is a nuisance.
"the cop trying to protect Gates house."
If this were a story about a cop who came to Gates house to protect
it, found out he was mistaken, got berated by Gates, and left, then
you'd have a point, Gates would be the jerk. But in this story the
cop used his authority to use force over his fellow citizens to
arrest Gates. That wasn't about protecting Gates' house at all, it
was about protecting his authority and thin skin.
Neu Mejican|7.23.09 @ 1:53PM|#
A professional and appropriate way to diffuse the situation -
walk off the man's property...go ask a neighbor to confirm that the
yelling man does indeed live there.
Another: use your fancy police data-base to match the name you got
off the ID with records of who lives there.
The list could go on and on.
|7.23.09 @ 1:54PM|#
Gates made this about race by screaming at the cop trying to
protect Gates house.
Is it fucking illegal to "make something about race"? My god, you
are so blinded by your hatred for Gates that you'll excuse any
violation of rights. Absolutely, pig-fellatingly pathetic.
|7.23.09 @ 1:54PM|#
The cop did not arrest Gates because he was black. The cop arrested Gates because Gates dared to get angry at him and go after him. The charges were dropped. Gates was innocent of the charges. The cop arrested him because the cop was an authoritarian dickhead who didn't like the way Gates talked to him.
|7.23.09 @ 1:56PM|#
Gates was an asshole, but that's not a crime. The cop arrested
him for a non-crime, which is a false arrest, which is a
crime.
-jcr
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 1:57PM|#
"Is it fucking illegal to "make something about race"? My god,
you are so blinded by your hatred for Gates that you'll excuse any
violation of rights. Absolutely, pig-fellatingly pathetic."
Calm down, honey.
You're use of strawsmen is amazing.
I never said it was "illeagal to make something about race".
But I think it immoral to suck the racist victim teat in order to
make a living, because it perpetuates mendacity at the expense of
social progress.
|7.23.09 @ 1:58PM|#
Space Fiend, you forgot about fake terrorist plots. I think Gates saw it as an opportunity to beef up his daily oppression lecture.
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 1:59PM|#
"Space Fiend, you forgot about fake terrorist plots. I think
Gates saw it as an opportunity to beef up his daily oppression
lecture."
Yup. His bread and butter.
|7.23.09 @ 1:59PM|#
nebby,
Honestly, who cares? Yeah, Gates was probably being a dick by
racebaiting. The cop felt slighted and decided to abuse his
official powers by arresting this guy who -- again -- was probably
acting like a dick.
Some people are apparently so sooo soooo upset about somebody
saying the word "racist" that they seem to think that false arrests
and abuses of police power are no big deal. If Gates had just
called the cop a "jerk off," "asshole," "dipshit," or whatever, I
get the feeling that a lot of people would wake up and smell the
abuse of power. But no, he said "race." Ooooh - race! Boogety,
boogety, boo! He deserves what he gets after that, right?
|7.23.09 @ 2:00PM|#
But I think it immoral to suck the racist victim teat in
order to make a living, because it perpetuates mendacity at the
expense of social progress.
And what does that have to do with being arrested for merely being
rude?
Are you sure you're not joe? Because you sure argue like him.
That's not a compliment.
MNG|7.23.09 @ 2:01PM|#
I'm no expert on Gates, so I don't know if he is in general a
race-baiter (what little I do know, as I said upthread, suggests to
me he is not), and his appearnces on tv over this did not seem to
be focused on race baiting (again, I don't claim comprehensive
knowledge here).
But even if he did start in with race-baiting that's irrelevant to
the point we who are upset about the arrest are making here that
the arrest itself was unwarranted and an abuse of authority.
I don't blame him much if he did race-bait. It's such low hanging
fruit when you are mad. I'm a feminist oriented guy, and my wife
works at a prestigous job and I am proud of her. But sometimes,
when we are arguing about things like who watches the kid more, I
will blurt out "oh, what kind of mom works 50 hours a week away
from her kids" I know it's bullshit, but it's like society has hung
that club up easily within reach and when you are mad and in a
moment it's so tempting to grab it. Gates was mad, and so it was
probably natural to say "oh, because I'm a black man?" It's
lamentable but understandable. But again, irrelevant to the fact
that those who are given the authority of a cop should be held to a
higher standard than the rest of us, and when they abuse that
authority we must all be on guard.
Xeones|7.23.09 @ 2:01PM|#
Race-baiting is a dick move, not a crime. That is all. What JCR said then follows.
|7.23.09 @ 2:02PM|#
So, a cop arrives at the scene, mentally preparing himself for
what might be a desperate struggle with two men thought to be
burglars. He's amped up, can't know if he'll have to defend
himself.
Instead, he finds two men, one the resident, who explain their
presence. As the tension releases, does the resident offer thanks
that the officer arrived promptly, to protect his property and,
possibly, his person?
No! Instead, the resident unleashes a tirade upon the officer, with
accusations and opprobrium. Along with a "Do you know who I am?"
threat and pursuit as the officer was leaving, I'm sure this went a
long ways in determining officer's reaction. The citizen offered no
gratitude to the man who had, willingly, entered what might have
been a life-ending situation for him. It is more likely that what
the officer was feeling was not his 'racism', but, his disgust that
he hung it all out for such ingrate.
A normal reaction would have been gratitude to the officer and the
system that provided protection for the citizen. An abnormal
response is that it's ALL about skin color.
Federal Dog|7.23.09 @ 2:02PM|#
"But I think it immoral to suck the racist victim teat in order
to make a living, because it perpetuates mendacity at the expense
of social progress."
Crying wolf also encourages people to dismiss allegations of racism
out of hand, thus victimizing those who are actually victims of
racism.
The cop went too far in arresting him, but the arrest had nothing
to do with racism. Gates acted like an arrogant and abusive
asshole, and instead of walking away, the cop let his emotions
trump good judgment. Contempt of cop is not racism.
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 2:03PM|#
"If Gates had just called the cop a "jerk off," "asshole,"
"dipshit," or whatever, I get the feeling that a lot of people
would wake up and smell the abuse of power. But no, he said "race."
Ooooh - race! Boogety, boogety, boo!
And you know full well that if he hadn't have framed this as a
ricist incident, he wouldn't get splashed all over the media and
Obama wouldn't be making comments about it.
Gates is a mendacious race-whore.
|7.23.09 @ 2:04PM|#
Had it been Cornell West the cop wouldn't have been able to understand anyhting he was saying and thus no arrest.
MNG|7.23.09 @ 2:05PM|#
OK, OK, I'm going to have to ask you guys who keep calling Gates
a "race-baiter" for whom race-huckstering is "his bread and butter"
to prove that shit. It's irrelevant to what those of us opposed to
the arrest are angry about, but again, it doesn't jibe with my
experience of the man.
When i saw him talk about Lincoln he was very nuanced about race;
he could have been all "hey Lincoln was a racist who said things
opposing social and legal equality for blacks and supported
shipping blacks back to Africa" but he did not, he said the man had
some racist ideas, quite normal for folks in his day, but that he
also grew and became more nuanced in his racial thinking. That did
not strike me as race-baiting...
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 2:05PM|#
"And what does that have to do with being arrested for merely
being rude?"
I do not condone the arrest. I do not condone Gate's racist
behavior.
I have never claimed anything else.
MNG|7.23.09 @ 2:07PM|#
"does the resident offer thanks that the officer"
"A normal reaction would have been gratitude to the officer and the
system that provided protection for the citizen"
I don't want to steal Epi's justified thunder, but why stop there
Thomas, why not suggest that he should have offered to suck the
cop's dick in gratitude for his service?
sheesh
|7.23.09 @ 2:07PM|#
I do not condone Gate's racist behavior.
I'm still waiting for an explanation of how this has anything to do
with the right to be a dick.
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 2:07PM|#
"Crying wolf also encourages people to dismiss allegations of
racism out of hand, thus victimizing those who are actually victims
of racism.
The cop went too far in arresting him, but the arrest had nothing
to do with racism. Gates acted like an arrogant and abusive
asshole, and instead of walking away, the cop let his emotions
trump good judgment. Contempt of cop is not racism."
This.
|7.23.09 @ 2:08PM|#
The pigs grow increasingly thin-skinned.
No kidding. And this seems to be an obvious case of a
respect-my-authorataaaa type of pig. But I've seen worse on
Radley's blog that never get the coverage that this has.
As mentioned above the "This is what happens to a black man in
America!" is getting old. Like Wanda Sykes said, "It is hard to
complain about the man when you are the man." So to all you black
liberals out there, "fuck you." When you start questioning the evil
drug war, the one policy that fucks up more lives of black men than
any other and that the drug war gives bigot cops legal cover to do
as they please, then I will start giving a shit what you have to
say about race.
kilroy|7.23.09 @ 2:08PM|#
"A lot of the time, people forget that they own far less
property than they actually do. About half of my front yard
actually belongs to the City and County of Honolulu, but the city
owned part looks just like the private part."
I'm aware that there is an easement that bounds public roadways,
etc. Here in GA at least that means you still own it (I pay
property taxes on it and it's deeded to me at the courthouse) but
you can't build on it and the government can fuck it up without
notice. Gates was on his porch when arrested and by the photos it
looks like there was a large area 30-40' in front of the home. I
can't imagine anyone believing that his porch wasn't his
property.
"As I understand it, "disorderly conduct" in Massachusetts
requires some form of "public" disruption."
I would hope that the disruption would have to be accompanied by
someone complaining about the disruption. I know that even though I
have a right to put a siren on my property and blare it 27/7, if it
negatively impacts the private property of my neighbours they have
a right to call the cops and make me stop. This is because my
property rights don't trump theirs. I'd suggest that some complaint
would also be required from someone in the public for my conduct to
be publicly disorderly.
MNG|7.23.09 @ 2:08PM|#
"I do not condone the arrest. I do not condone Gate's racist
behavior."
The two are just not comparable on the outrage meter.
"mac acts like jerk" is not as outrageous as "cop falsely arrests
man"
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 2:08PM|#
"OK, OK, I'm going to have to ask you guys who keep calling
Gates a "race-baiter" for whom race-huckstering is "his bread and
butter" to prove that shit."
RTFA
Xeones|7.23.09 @ 2:10PM|#
A normal reaction would have been gratitude to the officer
and the system that provided protection for the citizen. An
abnormal response is that it's ALL about skin color.
Maybe Gates' response was "abnormal." However, it was not ILLEGAL.
The cop, therefore, had no justification to arrest him. End of
story.
MNG|7.23.09 @ 2:10PM|#
"Gates acted like an arrogant and abusive asshole"
Way to take the police report as Gospel there, fed dog! Get your
nose out of the police ass for a second...
|7.23.09 @ 2:12PM|#
OK, pig-suckers: do you have any other evidence besides the cop's statement that Gates was being race-obsessed?
MNG|7.23.09 @ 2:12PM|#
"Maybe Gates' response was "abnormal." However, it was not
ILLEGAL. The cop, therefore, had no justification to arrest him.
End of story."
Does anyone here dispute Xeone's logic here? It seems to me to
perfectly sum up the whole point of the thread.
If you dispute it, please say so and why so we can skip all of this
irrelevant bullshit.
max hats|7.23.09 @ 2:14PM|#
Wait, so the cop arrested him after ID was shown? Why
was showing ID such a central point of contention in last nights
argument on this same subject?
This new story is much more damning than the old story.
|7.23.09 @ 2:14PM|#
Cops always run a check on IDs during threshold
inquiries,
How do you run an ID check while you are standing on someone's
porch arguing with them?
The citizen offered no gratitude to the man who had, willingly,
entered what might have been a life-ending situation for
him.
The cop was doing his job. Gratitude might be nice, but it isn't
required.
The cop ran out of any claim on gratitude when he didn't act
professionally when Gates got irate with him.
skr|7.23.09 @ 2:14PM|#
@ tim
if you read the police report it says the id provided was a drivers
license.
|7.23.09 @ 2:14PM|#
Civil Discourse,
No, I don't know that. This guy is an extremely famous professor in
his field. Even if he had said absolutely nothing about race, you
can bet that this would be all over the news. Yes, someone would
subsequently say something about race, but so what?
As to the "he's a race baiter" point, I've been giving the cop the
benefits of the doubt and assuming that Mr. Gates brought up race
unfairly, but I honestly don't know the pertinent facts. Did the
officer actually address Gates as "boy," as has been alleged? Is
there pattern of unfair questioning of black professors in
Caimbridge, as has been alleged? I don't know the answer to any of
this. Maybe it's all b.s. Maybe not.
The point is that this was an abuse of police power. The real story
is that some cops expect you to kiss their ass, and
they'll arrest you for challenging them or failing to thoroughly
kiss and lick their colon clean. And more importantly, about 60% of
America thinks this is the natural order, and that Gates "should
have known better" than to say mean thinks to the men in blue.
That's pretty sad.
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 2:17PM|#
"OK, pig-suckers: do you have any other evidence besides the
cop's statement that Gates was being race-obsessed?"
"which one?"
Pick one:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Henry+Louis+Gates%22+%22a+black+man+in+america%22&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
MNG|7.23.09 @ 2:17PM|#
"they'll arrest you for challenging them or failing to
thoroughly kiss and lick their colon clean"
This is an offense for which some of the more pro-cop posters here
need not fear.
A strong tongue makes for a free man is seemingly their
motto...
¢|7.23.09 @ 2:18PM|#
This seems to have been a symmetrical battle of assholes.
Asshole cop can arrest Gates to show momentary dominance, and
asshole Gates has the status to get the charge dropped. Draw.
Long story short, if a police officer ever asks you to talk
about something "outside," it's a trick to nab you on a disorderly
conduct charge.
If Gates lived in the world out here where people actually do get
fucked with by racist cops all the time, he'd know that. But he's
lived a life completely isolated from it, so he didn't know how to
deal.
Even on the most charitable reading of his own account, he hammed
it up ridiculously. That's a show of ignorance about the world he
makes his living talking about, and he should be mocked for
that.
Daniel|7.23.09 @ 2:19PM|#
"if you read the police report it says the id provided was a
drivers license."
Harvard ID was produced first prompting the call to Harvard
police.
I'd like to hear the transmissions from SGT. Crowley's radio to
hear the professors words.
KateC|7.23.09 @ 2:19PM|#
If Gates was white and Bush commented, MSM would be storming the White House, brandishing torches and axes.
|7.23.09 @ 2:20PM|#
A strong tongue makes for a free man...
My wife also says this. Sorry -- low hanging fuit.
|7.23.09 @ 2:21PM|#
Pick one:
Every single link states that the police report claims he said
that, you mendacious twit. Try again.
Jennifer|7.23.09 @ 2:23PM|#
A normal reaction would have been gratitude to the officer
and the system that provided protection for the citizen.
Thank you, sir! May I have another?
Xeones|7.23.09 @ 2:24PM|#
Even on the most charitable reading of his own account, he
hammed it up ridiculously. That's a show of ignorance about the
world he makes his living talking about, and he should be mocked
for that.
Perhaps he should be mocked, but he should never have been
arrested.
|7.23.09 @ 2:27PM|#
Kate,
I really love all the "if he were xyz," or wouldn't this be
different if "xyz happened instead." Blah. Blah. Blah.
How about this hypothetical: If Gates were arrested, and Obama
commented, somebody named Kate would probably want to talk about
something completely imaginary.
|7.23.09 @ 2:30PM|#
"A normal reaction would have been gratitude to the officer
and the system that provided protection for the citizen"
So it's not OK to have an unusual POV? Is being a unique individual
an arrestable offense?
And, frankly, a more normal response would have been fear of being
arrested, and feigned respect accompanied by a falsely polite
demeanor. Gratitude would not be something I would be feeling at
that point, unless the police officer was incredibly pleasant and
courteous and professional, saying something like, "Thank you for
providing ID establishing you reside here. I'll be leaving now.
Have a nice day."
I seriously doubt that was the vibe here.
|7.23.09 @ 2:31PM|#
The citizen offered no gratitude to the man who had,
willingly, entered what might have been a life-ending situation for
him.
Awwwww. Fuck that shit. If this pig wanted gratitude, then he
should got the fuck outta Gate's house once he learned it was his
house. Fuck pig gratitude. It called doing your job. Millions of
people go about there business doing their jobs and no fucking
displays of gratitude. When I worked at Taco Bell, no one ever came
up to me and said, "hey man, you fried the hell out of those
nachos. Good job." Why? Cuz it was my fucking job, that's why. This
cop get paid, and likely paid well, good insurance, and can shoot
dogs with impunity. That's enough fucking gratitude.
And the "it might have been life threatening." STFU. Whaaaa!!!! If
the pig can't handle the risk, go work for a florist.
Federal Dog|7.23.09 @ 2:31PM|#
Some of the comments on this thread are way over the top. People
you are attacking as "pig fellators" and "pig suckers" regularly
comment here in the most critical terms about police
overreaching.
Cops use radio to check IDs. In this case, they sought to verify
the Harvard ID by contacting the Harvard cops.
JD|7.23.09 @ 2:31PM|#
Goddamn it, I wrote this long thing, and then the server
squirrels ate it. Shorter version: Incidents rarely involve an
angel and a devil, but usually involve at least one pigheaded jerk,
often two, because jerks are more likely to come into conflict.
This sounds like what happened here.
The cop was being a typical thin-skinned pig who decided to arrest
somebody for "disrespect of cop". Gates, rather than handle things
calmly and with a minimum of fuss, decided to be a loud-mouthed,
abusive asshole for little apparent reason, then act shocked,
shocked, when that didn't work out so well for him.
Conclusion: screw both of those idiots. We should be more concerned
with the actions of the cop, though, since he is an agent of the
state.
John C. Randolph: You're not going to get a charge of "false
arrest" to stick. Cops have pretty wide latitude in who they
arrest.
|7.23.09 @ 2:35PM|#
"I am sorry, but I don't play that way. Cops are not above the
law. They are public servents. They get paid to take shit from the
public once in a while."
Agreed. Things like (the seemingly now defunct) copswritingcops.com
and the "get out of jail free for me and my kin" thin blue line
bumper stickers raise my dander.
hmm|7.23.09 @ 2:37PM|#
A normal reaction would have been gratitude to the officer
and the system that provided protection for the citizen.
Color me Abby Normal. My first reaction is to ask the officer to
walk to the edge of my property with me and ask, "Am I free to go."
If I want his protection I will call. I don't see me calling for
police protection anytime soon, maybe for the report and loopholes
required for various things. But protection? No thanks. I got that
covered in spades.
hmm|7.23.09 @ 2:39PM|#
I am sorry, but I don't play that way. Cops are not above
the law.
They have more restrictions than I do. Of course this isn't in
practice, just theory.
|7.23.09 @ 2:40PM|#
Wow - so much ignorance in one place. Fact 1 - it's not his home - it's university housing. Secondly criticizing the police isn't a crime but disorderly conduct is. Screaming at them that they're racists and refusing to identify yourself in the course of an investigation is disorderly conduct. Read the report including the witness corroboration.
+|7.23.09 @ 2:40PM|#
Gates did initially refuse to show his ID (an unsurprising
response from an innocent man confronted by police in his own
home)
Unsurprising? I would have shown the cop proof of my residence if
it would have gotten him out of my house. Why make things even more
difficult for yourself? Was Gates guilty of his own kind of
"profiling" in refusing to cooperate with a white
cop?
Gates was pissed off that he couldn't get into his own house, then
he took out his rage and frustration on a cop trying to do his job.
It wasn't a lynching. Nobody burned a cross on his lawn. Liberals
and libertarians alike are all too ready to scream "racist",
especially when law enforcement is involved. Grow up.
|7.23.09 @ 2:41PM|#
The cop was an idiot for letting Gates sucker him in to the arrest. The incedent boosts Gates black cred. The only other reason I can think of for Gates reacting that way is that it is fun cussing at cops.
|7.23.09 @ 2:47PM|#
"There hasn't been a rush of reports countering Officer
Crowley's account. If his report is even close to accurate, I
believe that it is Gates that was the the antagonizer."
You can antagonize anyone you wish in your own home, as long as the
exit is unimpeded. The cop was just a blowhard jackboot wannbe,
with an attitude and absolute immunity. Dangerous combination.
Elemenope|7.23.09 @ 2:48PM|#
And here they come. "Gates would scream racism if they
didn't hassle him on his own property". You people are fucking
pathetic. What chaps your ass more, the fact that he gave a
pig some shit, or that he did it and is black?
This here is what is bothering me the most about the response,
especially in these here parts. If the victim was white and all
other facts remain the same, there would be not one
normally-libertarian voice here sticking up for the pigs. Not
one.
But it's a black liberal Harvard professor, so fuck him, right? His
assertion that race was the but-for in the situation may or may not
be correct (but considering how many black intellectuals consider
Henry Louis Gates an accomodationalist wuss, it is not likely that
he would just scream racism out of nowhere), but it doesn't even
matter. As Epi expertly pointed out, he could have said anything
short of a direct threat to violence, and it being his house (which
he had already proved via ID) he can say pretty much whatever comes
into his head. Where the fuck is the other side of this? It's
somehow more OK to fuck with a guy in his home if he's
black/liberal/ivory tower moss?
|7.23.09 @ 2:51PM|#
For the record -
I'm not screaming racist cop.
I'm screaming asshole cop illegally abusing his authority because
some citizen* didn't treat hem deferentially enough. Cops
do it to all regardlerss of race creed, national origin, or
gender.
* Remember when that word used to mean something to gov't
officials? If your under 40, probably not.
|7.23.09 @ 2:53PM|#
I just have to use that word. Maybe it is because his peers think he's an accomodationalist wuss that he escalated the confrontation to get himself arrested.
Space Fiend|7.23.09 @ 2:53PM|#
Black guy who is having all kinds of professional problems locks himself out of his house and has to break his own door down. At that point, he was obviously looking for a fight [saying yo momma to a cop? seriously?]. Of course, the cop, being a pig, was more then happy to give him one. Both parties got what they wanted here.
kilroy|7.23.09 @ 2:55PM|#
"Fact 1 - it's not his home - it's university
housing."
It's private property. Gates pays the rent and has ownership
authority there. Even if Harvard were a public university I don't
think it would matter. He pays the rent, it's his house.
|7.23.09 @ 2:55PM|#
"Fact 1 - it's not his home - it's university
housing."
Do you mean that he didn't own the house? That he did not have a
lease? That he did not actually live there? At a minimum he
probably had a lease, which renders "Fact 1" completely irrelevant.
And you have a point about "disorderly conduct". It's what the
police use to arrest somebody for pissing them off.
Federal Dog|7.23.09 @ 2:56PM|#
"But it's a black liberal Harvard professor, so fuck him,
right?"
Wrong. He's resorting to reflexive charges of racism where none
existed, thereby damaging people who have actually been/will be
victimized by racism.
On that score, yes: Fuck him. Definitely. Getting judges and jurors
to acknowledge real racism is hard enough without this fraud crying
wolf and encouraging automatic disbelief.
robc|7.23.09 @ 2:57PM|#
strange it is to see so many libertarians being so
deferential to the government rep here
What libertarians? The names I recognize are all on the
douchenozzle's (Gates) side.
|7.23.09 @ 2:57PM|#
Gates did nothing to be arrested for and the cop clearly got him
out on the porch in order to have a thin excuse to arrest
him.
But I'd still like to see how it all went down, just from a purely
puerile perspective. Mutual antagonism is a failing of mine, I
rubberneck it in other people.
I have a suspicion that Gates waved his Harvard ID (which would not
have his home address on it) and when the cop asked for a driver's
license (what he actually needed to verify that Gates was who he
said he was and was in his own home), Gates flipped out. Gates
expected a Harvard ID to be a magic wand and when it wasn't, a
petulancy was born.
Of course, all this is also dependent on the cop's demeanor as
well. The aggressive asshole routine is a common tactic to "rattle"
people. (A prime example of this was when my friend Ethan had minor
car accident in the middle of the day with an extremely pregnant
woman and the first thing out of the cop's mouth was "OK, how much
have the two of you had to drink?")
Again, for the cheap seats... the cop is to blame, he's the one
that had the duty to defuse the situation and not be a thin-skinned
little prick, but I'd like to see how it came to the result it
did.
Civil Discourse|7.23.09 @ 2:58PM|#
"Screaming at them that they're racists and refusing to identify
yourself in the course of an investigation is disorderly conduct.
Read the report including the witness corroboration."
Top someone like Epi, the winess corroboration doesn't count
because it's in the police report.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 2:59PM|#
Wow - so much ignorance in one place. Fact 1 - it's not his
home - it's university housing.
This is true, but irrelevant to the question at hand. A leasee or
tenant is equally entitled to berate cops on their leased premises
as a homeowner is, unless there is a specific clause in his lease
saying he's not.
Secondly criticizing the police isn't a crime but disorderly
conduct is. Screaming at them that they're racists and refusing to
identify yourself in the course of an investigation is disorderly
conduct.
No, it's not.
http://www.slate.com/id/2223379/
The arresting officer alleges that Gates shouted at him and threatened to speak to his "mama." He then arrested Gates for disorderly conduct. What, exactly, is disorderly conduct?
Behavior that might cause a riot. Massachusetts courts have limited the definition of disorderly conduct to: fighting or threatening, violent or tumultuous behavior, or creating a hazardous or physically offensive condition for no legitimate purpose other than to cause public annoyance or alarm. (The statute, however, just says "idle and disorderly persons," a formulation that is, on its own, patently unconstitutional.) Violators may be imprisoned for up to six months, fined a maximum of $200, or both.
The stilted language in the Gates police report is intended to mirror the courts' awkward phrasing, but the state could never make the charge stick. The law is aimed not at mere irascibility but rather at unruly behavior likely to set off wider unrest. Accordingly, the behavior must take place in public or on private property where people tend to gather. While the police allege that a crowd had formed outside Gates' property, it is rare to see a disorderly conduct conviction for behavior on the suspect's own front porch. In addition, political speech is excluded from the statute because of the First Amendment. Alleging racial bias, as Gates was doing, and protesting arrest both represent core political speech.
Thank you, please come again.
|7.23.09 @ 3:00PM|#
Wow - so much ignorance in one place. Fact 1 - it's not his
home - it's university housing. Secondly criticizing the police
isn't a crime but disorderly conduct is. Screaming at them that
they're racists and refusing to identify yourself in the course of
an investigation is disorderly conduct. Read the report including
the witness corroboration.
I read the report for the Kathryn Johnston raid. I no longer give a
lot of credence to what police report or swear to. What witnesses
were in the house? None but the professor and the jerkoff cop. Who
cares who owns it? The professor was the legal resident and that's
all that matters.
How's cop sperm taste anyway?
Zeb|7.23.09 @ 3:01PM|#
"Wow - so much ignorance in one place. Fact 1 - it's not his
home - it's university housing. Secondly criticizing the police
isn't a crime but disorderly conduct is. Screaming at them that
they're racists and refusing to identify yourself in the course of
an investigation is disorderly conduct. Read the report including
the witness corroboration."
Wow, what marvelously ironic ignorance. All accounts state that he
did identify himself. And the fact that he rents from Harvard is
irrelevant, it is still his home. This is a private house, not a
dorm. You don't need to hold the deed to a property for it to be
your private residence.
If he had been reasonably and appropriately charged with disorderly
conduct then the charges would not have been immediately
dropped.
|7.23.09 @ 3:03PM|#
I read Radley Balko's articles regularly, and it's very clear
that too many police officers regularly abuse their authority, and
often commit crimes themselves against the citizens they're
supposed to protect. And, of course, the incidence of abuse is much
greater than we know, because only a fraction of such occurrences
are discovered and publicized.
But there's almost no other topic that's guaranteed to get a stream
of unhinged commentary on this site than a story about a police
officer.
I get it -- you all own multiple guns, hate authority, and can kick
ass by yourselves if anyone tries to mess with you or your
property. But the fact is that the police serve a very important
role in society, and it probably would be better to have a more
nuanced opinion of that role than is regularly spewed in these
comments.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 3:04PM|#
By the way, I'd just like to point out one odd thing:
Eight months ago Jonah Goldberg would not have
acknowledged that it was possible for a "conservative" to be
against the cop here - let alone say there was some kind of
conservative "divide". Eight months ago Goldberg would have
considered backing the cop a litmus test of conservatism and anyone
who failed to do so would have been just some kind of commie
bastard.
|7.23.09 @ 3:04PM|#
"What libertarians? The names I recognize are all on the
douchenozzle's (Gates) side."
A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally:
(1) engages in fighting or in tumultuous conduct;
(2) makes unreasonable noise and continues to do so after being
asked to stop; or
(3) disrupts a lawful assembly of persons;
is guilty of disorderly conduct douchenozzelry and
shall be taught a lesson about not respecting the cops.
Jesse Walker|7.23.09 @ 3:07PM|#
OK, OK, I'm going to have to ask you guys who keep calling
Gates a "race-baiter" for whom race-huckstering is "his bread and
butter" to prove that shit.
They can't. They haven't read a word of Gates' work. They have no
idea what his politics are. They are completely unaware that, as
Elemenope just put it, "many black intellectuals consider Henry
Louis Gates an accomodationalist wuss." They just assume any
professor of black studies must be Al Sharpton.
I don't know if the cop was a racist. But some of the commenters
here clearly are.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 3:07PM|#
Well, one thing's for sure: If somebody really does try to break into his house, they'll have plenty of time to do whatever they want before the cops arrive.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 3:08PM|#
But the fact is that the police serve a very important role
in society, and it probably would be better to have a more nuanced
opinion of that role than is regularly spewed in these
comments.
You know who else plays an important role in our society? Example:
The President. But if the President starts breaking laws, even
minor laws, and starts abusing his power to punish people who
insult him, CRUCIFY THE MOTHERFUCKER.
It is precisely because the police play an important role in
society that they must not be allowed to step outside of their
proper defined powers for even a moment without the hammer coming
down on them like a motherfucking asteroid strike. The guy's not
mopping floors somewhere, he's been entrusted to use violence in
the name of the public.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:09PM|#
lmnop,
there would be not one normally-libertarian voice here sticking
up for the pigs. Not one.
You too. Show me one. I dont see a libt voice I recognize sticking
up for the pigs. Not one.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:11PM|#
I have a suspicion that Gates waved his Harvard
ID
I use my concealed carry permit in situations like that (and in
bars, which is much more common).
Zeb|7.23.09 @ 3:12PM|#
If you favor freedom, you favor it for everyone, even people
with stupid collectivist ideas who would like to limit freedom.
That is the tricky part of being libertarianish.
Penn Jillette said it very well, something to the effect of "I care
about freedom so much that I don't even want to tell other people
what they should think or how I think they should vote." That is
why libertarianism is both the best political philosophy and the
least likely to actually succeed in politics.
|7.23.09 @ 3:13PM|#
On that score, yes: Fuck him. Definitely. Getting judges and
jurors to acknowledge real racism is hard enough without this fraud
crying wolf and encouraging automatic disbelief.
So because a person may have been being an asshole, throw his
rights in the garbage. Unbelievable. Really, you people are just
stunning.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 3:15PM|#
But it seems to me you'd have to be awfully authoritarian to
think that Gates owes Crowley an apology, as opposed to the other
way around.
False dichotomy. Whether or not Crowley owes Gates an apology for
arresting him, Gates owes Crowley an apology for calling him a
racist.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:16PM|#
I dont think Crowley owes Gates an apology. I think Crowley owes the rest of us his badge.
|7.23.09 @ 3:17PM|#
Jesse, yesterday I defended Gates against an even more racist friend. But jumping our shit because we stereotype the Chair of Harvard's African Studies program is a little harsh. Had he been a professor of economics or anthropology I would be much less likely to assume the worst.
|7.23.09 @ 3:18PM|#
As an aside, something I've noticed in these internet wankfests is that everyone feels that they explain their side calmly and rationally, and that all of their opponents are "screaming".
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 3:20PM|#
I dont think Crowley owes Gates an apology. I think Crowley
owes the rest of us his badge.
Because he didn't hand it to the guy who was yelling at him.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:20PM|#
manmooth,
Its easy to know when Im screaming internally. Count the "fucks" in
my posts.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:22PM|#
Because he didn't hand it to the guy who was yelling at
him.
No, because he not only didnt walk away from the guy yelling at
him, he then arrested him falsely.
If I was sure he knew it was a false arrest, I would be in favor of
him going to jail for a while too.
|7.23.09 @ 3:23PM|#
From J sub D's link:
Sooner or later we won't be able to conduct a traffic stop on a black occupied vehicle, or arrest a black person for anything. I think the right way to approach this is to conduct as much racial profiling as I can, stop , abuse and tazer every fucking black citizen I can before the laws change and we wind up in shoot outs daily.
The site seems to be aggressive about banning and deleting posts it
doesn't like, so it must be assumed that they agree with this
comment...
|7.23.09 @ 3:23PM|#
This is as I've said in previous posts on the same subject, The officer responding to a reported break-in\burglary had the right to request ID from the person in the house WHETHER OR NOT the person in the home was the legal occupant. The officer had Probable Cause to request the ID. All Gates had to do was be polite, show his ID, and answer two or three routine follow-up questions and the incident would have been over. Gates brought his arrest on himself and anyone who finds him or her self in a similar situation wpuld do well to realize the officer likely DOES NOT KNOW who lives in the house, so please people a little patients please.
Federal Dog|7.23.09 @ 3:23PM|#
"So because a person may have been being an asshole, throw his
rights in the garbage. Unbelievable. Really, you people are just
stunning."
I expressly stated that the arrest was wrongful and resulted from
overreaching.
Ratchet down the emotion already. I have never claimed that because
Gates is making fraudulent claims of racism here that his --
anyone's -- rights should be thrown in the garbage.
On the contrary: I am angry because his fraud is actively damaging
people whom I help defend against actual police racism. As criminal
defense counsel, I deal with this crap every day, and there are
real racists out there who will get away with abuse because of
Gates and reflexive disbelief that his fraud in this matter is
bound to encourage.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 3:24PM|#
No, because he not only didnt walk away from the guy yelling
at him, he then arrested him falsely.
Glad you're not a cop in my neighborhood. Or at all.
bubba|7.23.09 @ 3:27PM|#
A professor of African American Studies escalated an ambiguous
police encounter into a racial incident.
Go figure.
NP|7.23.09 @ 3:30PM|#
FWIW, the white cop in question is apparently "a police academy expert on racial profiling," according to this AP article.
|7.23.09 @ 3:32PM|#
Well, one thing's for sure: If somebody really does try to
break into his house, they'll have plenty of time to do whatever
they want before the cops arrive.
Yes, as a matter of retaliation, that's likely. But in any event, I
happen to know from personal experience that in many jurisdictions,
the police won't arrive for over an hour anyway. I understand that
they have a lot on their plates and some jurisdictions are
seriously overworked, so this is partially justifiable, but it
burns my ass to hear that at least some of their workload is
devoted to harassing and falsely arresting citizens who have
slighted them. I also know this from personal experience. Years
ago, the police gave me an (improper) parking ticket when I called
them to stop my father from attacking my mother (the beating was in
progress when I called). I was 16 at the time, and perhaps a bit
annoyed that it took them so long to respond (an hour and a half),
when my mother could have died or been seriously injured in the
meantime. But I guess my improper attitude didn't fly with them.
Anyway, I'm glad they spent the time to issue the parking ticket to
a frightened and traumatized 16 year old instead of responding to
the next call. Turns out my car was legally parked anyway, but
whatever. Ah, good memories. Don't worry - it could never happen to
you.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:34PM|#
Glad you're not a cop in my neighborhood. Or at
all.
Me too, I would probably act like Crowley did. That is how I know
it is wrong.
I personally want personality profiles done as part of the
admission to the police academies and exclude anyone with an above
average appetite for power.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:35PM|#
If somebody really does try to break into his house, they'll have
plenty of time to do whatever they want before the cops
arrive.
Is that part of the new professionalism?
Xeones|7.23.09 @ 3:36PM|#
I hate it when Obama is right.
Stopped clocks, etc.
By the way, mantooth, quit screaming.
|7.23.09 @ 3:38PM|#
I wonder how many of the new faces around here are spillover from that piece of shit white power site Moose linked to yesterday.
Xeones|7.23.09 @ 3:40PM|#
I personally want personality profiles done as part of the
admission to the police academies and exclude anyone with an above
average appetite for power.
But then there would be, like, four cops. Bug, or feature?
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 3:41PM|#
Yes, as a matter of retaliation, that's likely.
More as a matter of CYA. What, they show up and it's him locked out
of his house again? Take the scenic route.
Me too, I would probably act like Crowley did. That is how I
know it is wrong.
Like I said.
Is that part of the new professionalism?
It's part of the old Cry Wolf.
Elemenope|7.23.09 @ 3:49PM|#
You too. Show me one. I dont see a libt voice I recognize
sticking up for the pigs. Not one.
Not so much on this thread (as far as "names I recognize") but the
first thread on this issue had a whole lot of hedging and hawing
from TAO, madmikefisk, and others about how mutual apologies are in
order and that it is unlikely there was any racism involved (so
quick after the event and before we even had much
information).
It struck me how quickly and without evidence several people were
looking to throw aspersions on the claim of racism and mitigate the
cops responsibility in the situation. That's what I'm talking about
re: "sticking up for the cop". There would be none of that hemming
and hawing if the magical r-word never became part of the story,
and seeing as how it is ultimately utterly irrelevant when
attempting to divine whether the officer did something wrong, it
smacks of red herring.
Elemenope|7.23.09 @ 3:50PM|#
But then there would be, like, four cops. Bug, or
feature?
They'd have to round up posses of probably even less well-balanced
people in order to enforce the law, so I'm going with bug.
Not that having lots of cops is any sort of a feature.
|7.23.09 @ 3:50PM|#
How about this: two grown men behaving like 10 year old boys in
a school yard, complete with "yo mama" references and
i-ain't-got-nuthin-to-apolgize-for assertions.
If just one had acted like an adult the whole thing would have
defused, if it happened at all. The cop could have just left the
screaming looney Prof once he confirmed who he was; the Prof could
have just thanked the cop for showing up to check, etc, etc.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:50PM|#
Jim,
The "Cry Wolf" analogy isnt correct. The person who called in wasnt
lying.
Now, if there was a story called "the Douchy Shepherd", you might
have a point.
Is it really so wrong to expect a cop to do his fucking job without
abusing anyone's rights?
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:52PM|#
lmnop,
I distinguish the racism from the cop misbehavior issues. I dont
see the racism. It might be there, it might not, no clue. Doesnt
change the fact that the cop misbehaved.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:54PM|#
lmnop,
It struck me how quickly and without evidence several people
were looking to throw aspersions on the claim of racism and
mitigate the cops responsibility in the situation.
Following up, I saw the first but not the 2nd in that thread. At
least from the names I recognized.
You and MNG seem to often jump to the conclusion that anyone
posting here is a libertarian, which is funny, considering.
|7.23.09 @ 3:55PM|#
Calling a cop that was obviously there to protect his property a racist screams of ulterior motive.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:55PM|#
They'd have to round up posses of probably even less
well-balanced people in order to enforce the law, so I'm going with
bug.
I was with you until the last word. :)
How about going back to the olde English system of catching/hiring
someone to catch the damn criminal yourself.
Yes, the thief catchers were often worse than the people they were
catching, but thats why they were good at it.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 3:56PM|#
What a shock, Fluffy's got a limited bag of tricks.
Treach, you used to be funny, man.
Liar.
robc|7.23.09 @ 3:56PM|#
steve,
If just one had acted like an adult the whole thing would have
defused, if it happened at all.
This is true. However, only one was getting paid by the state to
act like an adult.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 3:58PM|#
The "Cry Wolf" analogy isnt correct. The person who called
in wasnt lying.
If you really think the cops are going to rush back to the scene of
an national incident...
robc|7.23.09 @ 4:00PM|#
If you really think the cops are going to rush back to the
scene of an national incident...
I dont think they will. I think they should.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:01PM|#
Is it really so wrong to expect a cop to do his fucking job
without abusing anyone's rights?
Is it really so wrong to expect a cop not to put up with somebody
screaming at him for doing his, as you put it, fucking job? You
make it sound like Rodney King: The Next Generation. They cuffed
the guy and took him away. Happens every day.
robc|7.23.09 @ 4:02PM|#
Let me lay out my standard here, someone tell me if it is
wrong.
I expect ALL government employees to be above reproach at all times
while on duty.
Is that a ridiculously high standard? Maybe. Is it the right one? I
think so.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:02PM|#
I think they should.
Lotta "should" in the world. Keep "should" alive.
robc|7.23.09 @ 4:03PM|#
Is it really so wrong to expect a cop not to put up with
somebody screaming at him for doing his, as you put it, fucking
job?
Yes, I expect the cop to put up with it. That is, unfortunately,
part of the job.
JB|7.23.09 @ 4:04PM|#
1. Read the police reports:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates1.html
2. For those who think this is all about race (including douche
Obama and douche Gates), you are full of shit. Here is more
background on the officer who teaches a class in racial profiling
and gave CPR to Reggie Lewis:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99KBEAO1&show_article=1
3. The officer overstepped his bounds with the disorderly conduct
charge, BUT that is typical for DC charges.
I think most DC charges are a bunch of crap, but this was not that
unusual from most of them. So if you don't like this one, then you
should be bitching about the rest of them too. This has little to
do with race and more to due with cops having a thin-skin and
abusing the bullshit charge of DC. Gates was being a douche and is
himself very thin-skinned, but the officer should have just
left.
I've had friends on multiple occasions facing DC charges and been
threatened with them myself for bullshit reasons. I've been
threatened with DC for a lot less than Gates did.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:05PM|#
Yes, I expect the cop to put up with it.
Maybe you'll get to try it yourself someday.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 4:05PM|#
Is Criticizing Police a Crime Now?
Repeatedly verbally insulting a policeman -- or anyone else -- has
been illegal for 67 years. Look up the original "fighting words"
case, in which a street preacher was arrested for offensive conduct
for calling a cop "a racketeer" and "a fascist". The courts have
since clarified the decision to exclude punishing people for
viewpoint advocacy, but repeated insults remain illegal.
|7.23.09 @ 4:07PM|#
"How about going back to the olde English system of
catching/hiring someone to catch the damn criminal yourself.
Yes, the thief catchers were often worse than the people they were
catching, but thats why they were good at it."
It makes for great reading though:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Wild
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:07PM|#
Honestly, I would give Crowley a complete pass on the racism
accusation.
But it's very possible that this Lucia chick who called in was
unconsciously racist.
Gates is an elderly man with a cane. A cab was parked in front of
the house. Gates was carrying luggage, and the cabbie was carrying
luggage. If all of that stuff is invisible to you and all you can
see are two black guys trying to get into a house, and you think to
yourself, "Break-in!", then you probably are not exactly color
blind.
So Crowley may have been in the unfortunate position of being on a
call that only existed because of the caller's racism. [And I'm
just saying "may have been", OK?] But if you're Gates, to you it
wouldn't matter if it's the cop's personal racism or some witness'
racism. The cop is the sharp end of the spear of an incident that
smacks of racism to you, and he's also the only one in front of you
to receive your indignation.
If some cop comes to my door and wants to search it because the
electric company told the police I use too much power, the cop is
likely to bear the brunt of my resentment about our unjust drug
laws and search laws. He wasn't the guy who passed those laws, but
he's there.
robc|7.23.09 @ 4:07PM|#
Jim,
This isnt at all like Rodney King.
I have a scale to these things.
This was less bad than RK which was less bad than Kathryn
Johnston.
But all were still police abusing their power.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:08PM|#
Yeah, nice unintentonal humor in the headline. Like Gates was arrested for penning a sternly worded op-ed. First Amendment!
highnumber|7.23.09 @ 4:10PM|#
Lotta "should" in the world. Keep "should" alive.
"All we have is is."
Was that your point?
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:11PM|#
Yes, I expect the cop to put up with it.
Maybe you'll get to try it yourself someday.
No, I won't. Because I'll never be in Gates' house demanding his
ID. Ever.
And Jim, if you were in my house, I would tell you to get the fuck
out, and I would walk next to you telling you that you're a
douchebag every step of the way until you hit the property line.
And you know what? I would not be breaking the law. And as soon as
Gates demonstrated his identity and Crowley accepted it [and the
police report indicates Crowley accepted it], Crowley deserved no
more rights at Gates' house than you would have at mine.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:12PM|#
Yeah, nice unintentonal humor in the headline. Like Gates
was arrested for penning a sternly worded op-ed. First
Amendment!
A distinction without a difference.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 4:12PM|#
Yes, I expect the cop to put up with it. That is,
unfortunately, part of the job.
Maybe the cop should put up with it, but he is under no legal or
(so far as I know) contractual obligation to do so. There is no
"unless the victim is a cop" exception to most disorderly conduct
or fighting words laws.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:13PM|#
Was that your point?
How could it not be what you think it is?
And Jim, if you were in my house, I would tell you to get the
fuck out, and I would walk next to you telling you that you're a
douchebag every step of the way until you hit the property
line.
Your neighbors must love you.
JB|7.23.09 @ 4:13PM|#
Look up the original "fighting words" case...
"Fighting words" is a bunch of crap. And awful case law. I find the
word 'the' to be a fighting word. Anyone who says that to me
repeatedly, I can bludgeon with impunity. Such crap.
I'm still waiting for the day when I tell someone they should have
been aborted from their mother's rancid cunt, they take a swing at
me, and I beat the crap out of them. I will claim political speech
and I really want to see them claim "fighting words" and throw me
in jail for being a proponent of abortion.
Charles|7.23.09 @ 4:13PM|#
As some others have said, it is bizarre that anyone without a
stake in this can defend the cop's behavior. Arresting someone
because they're yelling at you? Even worse, apparently tricking
them into going outside in order to escalate the situation (in a
legal sense)?
If I am in my house, and a policeman comes into for whatever
reason, there is nothing I can say short of threatening violence or
admitting a crime that lets him do anything to me. Whether or not
Gates is a dick in this is entirely irrelevant.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:14PM|#
A distinction without a difference.
Between writing an op-ed and screaming in a cop's face? Wow, you're
just about the toughest guy I've ever even heard of.
|7.23.09 @ 4:15PM|#
"This is true. However, only one was getting paid by the state
to act like an adult."
As much as I hate being so agreeable I must be so in response to
this comment. If we can say one individual was under a greater
burden to keep his cool and act like an adult then clearly that
falls to the cop. Not only is he paid to act this way, he is,
purportedly, trained to do so.
He should apologize and once having done so the good professor
should abandon his offer to instruct the cop on the realities of
race in America and, instead, offer a similar apology. Something
along the lines of a (mutual): I lost my head and my cool, said and
did some things I regret, and apologize.
I lay odds at 50:1 against however.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:16PM|#
As some others have said, it is bizarre that anyone without
a stake in this can defend the cop's behavior.
Whereas anyone without a stake in it defending Gates' behavior is
in no way bizarre, and nobody had better say it is.
|7.23.09 @ 4:20PM|#
Surprise, surprise. Gates is starting a new project based on the incedent. It is sounding more and more like this was an attempt to gather more fodder for his premise about cops being racists. Which is probably true in many cases, but doesn't excuse this kind of behavior.
robc|7.23.09 @ 4:20PM|#
I havent seen anyone defend Gates's behavior. Heck, I called him a douchenozzle. His behavior doesnt have to be defended, he has the fundamental right to be a douchenozzle.
Winston Smith|7.23.09 @ 4:21PM|#
Bellowing at cops is no different that harboring subversive thoughts against the state.
|7.23.09 @ 4:22PM|#
. For those who think this is all about race (including
douche Obama and douche Gates), you are full of shit. Here is more
background on the officer who teaches a class in racial profiling
and gave CPR to Reggie Lewis:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99KBEAO1&show_article=1
AHAHAHAHAHA!!
I loved this when I read it. The cop going with the "I'm not racist
-- I gave CPR to a famous black basketball player 16 years
ago"
If CPR was necessary and this cop was there could he even have
refused to administer it if he didn't want to?
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:23PM|#
Maybe the cop should put up with it, but he is under no
legal or (so far as I know) contractual obligation to do so. There
is no "unless the victim is a cop" exception to most disorderly
conduct or fighting words laws.
In Massachusetts there is.
http://masscases.com/cases/app/46/46massappct471.html#back3
MA courts have held that the disorderly conduct statute can't be
applied to someone engaged in political speech.
"The police are treating me poorly because of my race" or whatever
agitated variant thereof that Gates came up with absolutely
qualifies.
Whereas anyone without a stake in it defending Gates' behavior
is in no way bizarre, and nobody had better say it is.
To defend the cop's behavior, you have to defend the arrest as a
lawful exercise of authority.
To defend Gates' behavior, you only have to believe that he should
be allowed to speak freely in his own home in the middle of the
day.
Gates was all of the things he has been accused of being: arrogant,
classist, elitist, unfair, unreasonable, too easily agitated. But
none of that matters. It just doesn't matter to the question of
whether he should have been arrested.
|7.23.09 @ 4:23PM|#
The report indicated that a crowd was gathering as Mr. Gates continued to be tumultuous. As I understand it, the police are trained to arrest the tumultuous one quickly to diffuse the tension so that the crowd, which can easily outnumber police in a neighborhood setting, does not get involved. Gives the hothead time to think about it and cool off too, and charges are rarely pursued unless injury or damage has occurred. I don't consider this a case of police overreaction, racism, or abuse of power. Just stupidity by Gates.
Charles|7.23.09 @ 4:24PM|#
"Whereas anyone without a stake in it defending Gates' behavior
is in no way bizarre, and nobody had better say it is."
As I said, it's probable that Gates is being a dick about this. But
that's not what is important about this situation. After all, isn't
one of the points of libertarianism that you can do whatever you
want on your own property, so long as you don't harm me? Although I
don't know if hurt feelings counts as harm to some.
Lots of bad people and criminals and okay people and good people
get falsely arrested in an atrocious display of how power can be
abused. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't also criticize the
police in those cases, too.
I have a cousin, Don, who had something of a wild youth. He got
arrested by or into fights with cops almost every weekend. Getting
arrested, for him, was part of having a good time.
But most people don't see arrest like that. It's embarrassing and
humiliating and expensive. We shouldn't let it happen without a
very good reason (like, say, committing or being suspected of
committing an actual crime, not just mouthing off to a police
officer).
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:24PM|#
If CPR was necessary and this cop was there could he even
have refused to administer it if he didn't want to?
It actually proves he's even more racist, if you don't
think about it.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:26PM|#
To defend Gates' behavior, you only have to believe that he
should be allowed to speak freely in his own home in the middle of
the day.
At the top of his lungs. To a cop. I'm sure you're speaking from a
rich vein of personal experience.
|7.23.09 @ 4:28PM|#
Look up the original "fighting words" case...
Ha! Yeah, look up the original fighting words case, but whatever
you do, don't look up subsequent precedent, which would make clear
that this line of cases is limited to words (1) likely to promote
violence, AND (2) that don't express a particular political view.
In this case, questioning the motives of the police regarding race
(rightly or wrongly) would be the very essence of political speech,
and there was nothing in Gates' comments even remotely violent,
suggestive of violence, or likely to actually incite
violence.
Dan, you get a D- for relying on a case in the 1940s without
reading the last half a century of precedent or analyzing the facts
at issue. And that D- unfortunately has to be downgraded to an F
because you also failed to look at the Massachusetts statute in
question, which has a "public" requirement that also wasn't
fulfilled. Sorry, no dice.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 4:28PM|#
Gates is an elderly man with a cane.
58 is "elderly" now?
If all of that stuff is invisible to you and all you can see
are two black guys trying to get into a house, and you think to
yourself, "Break-in!", then you probably are not exactly color
blind.
Replace the word "black" in that sentence with "white". Notice how
it no longer makes any sense at all? If a neighbor called the cops
because she saw an "elderly" white guy and a white cabbie breaking
into a house, it would never cross your mind to cry "racism" --
even if the caller was black. But in this case you don't hesitate
at all to suggest the caller is a racist. Why is that?
And even if she WAS more likely to suspect two black men of being
burglars than she would two white men that wouldn't automatically
suggest racism. It isn't sexist to worry more that a man might be a
rapist than we would for a woman, because men are far more likely
to commit rape than women are. Black men are far more likely to
commit burglarly than white men are. That's an objective fact;
recognizing it isn't racist. Blaming the criminal behavior ON their
race would be racist.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:29PM|#
After all, isn't one of the points of libertarianism that
you can do whatever you want on your own property, so long as you
don't harm me?
Now I'm supposed to defend libertarianism? The guy was a serious
asshole to a cop and got cuffed. This might be a more common
occurence than you suspect, and it might not be the sign of fascist
takeover you dread.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:31PM|#
At the top of his lungs. To a cop. I'm sure you're speaking
from a rich vein of personal experience.
Jim, I've been giving you a hard time, but I want to dial it back a
little bit to try to understand your point here.
Are you trying to be normative or descriptive?
Are you trying to argue that getting arrested for yelling at police
is normal and to be expected, or are you trying to argue
that it's good and the appropriate way for things to
be?
Dan|7.23.09 @ 4:33PM|#
MA courts have held that the disorderly conduct statute
can't be applied to someone engaged in political speech.
Correct but irrelevant, as this was not political speech.
"The police are treating me poorly because of my race" or
whatever agitated variant thereof that Gates came up with
absolutely qualifies.
Saying that the police as an organization are treating him poorly
because of his race would be protected speech because it doesn't
target an individual. But calling the specific policeman in
question a racist -- as Gates did -- absolutely does NOT qualify,
because it is an insult to that specific individual.
The street preacher arrested in the original fighting words case
was accusing the government and organized religion of all manner of
wrongdoing. That was legal. What was not legal was specifically
insulting the policeman who confronted him about it.
Gates could have stood on his porch ranting about how the system
discriminates against blacks and that would have been fine. But
once he got personal, it ceased being legally protected speech.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:35PM|#
Replace the word "black" in that sentence with "white".
Notice how it no longer makes any sense at all? If a neighbor
called the cops because she saw an "elderly" white guy and a white
cabbie breaking into a house, it would never cross your mind to cry
"racism" -- even if the caller was black.
Right, it wouldn't make sense. Because the point is that I don't
think she would have called at all if they were white. She would
have looked at the other factors in the scene and deduced that it
wasn't a criminal break in.
And always remember, I'm one of the people around here who proudly
would advocate the repeal of the Civil Rights Act. So I'm farther
to the right on race issues than 99% of the American public. But
even I can see how some middle-aged white cow might, just might, be
predisposed to overreact to what she sees as soon as she sees a
couple of black faces.
Charles|7.23.09 @ 4:36PM|#
"At the top of his lungs. To a cop. I'm sure you're speaking
from a rich vein of personal experience."
Whoa, so it's okay for cops to arrest people for yelling at them,
in their own homes? Seriously?
I'm not saying this is something that happens a lot so it's
acceptable -- maybe that's what you mean. But you know what else
also happens a lot? Lots of terrible stuff, that's what. Date rape,
prison rape, spousal abuse. What happened to Gates isn't that bad,
but it's still bad. And it's even more our (at least, if we lived
in Massachusetts) business than those other examples of people
being terrible to each other, because it's our government doing
it.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 4:37PM|#
Jim, I've been giving you a hard time, but I want to dial it
back a little bit to try to understand your point here.
Oh, goodie.
Are you trying to argue that getting arrested for yelling at
police is normal and to be expected, or are you trying to argue
that it's good and the appropriate way for things to be?
I'm trying to argue that if you scream at a cop long enough, even
if you're standing in your very own house, the cop might just
arrest you. Not tase you or beat you, but put you in handcuffs and
take you for a squad-car ride. It's terrible and it's awful, and
it's also quite preventable if you're not a complete jackass.
Whoops, gotta go. Got me a couple live ones trussed up in the
basement, and I hear Zed's motorsikkle pullin' up. Yeee-HAWWW!!
Charles|7.23.09 @ 4:37PM|#
"Now I'm supposed to defend libertarianism? The guy was a
serious asshole to a cop and got cuffed. This might be a more
common occurence than you suspect, and it might not be the sign of
fascist takeover you dread."
Okay, so we're way past each other. I think being an asshole to a
cop isn't an arrestable offense. Do you?
|7.23.09 @ 4:38PM|#
Doesn't everyone pretty much agree that (1) the cop was wrong to
arrest Gates, and (2) Gates was probably acting like an
asshole?
From what I can tell, the only disputed point is whether the
incident was racially motivated, and I haven't read any evidence of
that, at least as far as the cop goes.
Other than that, many of the commenters here simply are saying that
the police piss them off. Fine. But just because many police abuse
their authority, and further because the law gives them too much
authority to begin with, doesn't mean that it's okay to "call them
douchbags" and the like, particularly if they're not acting like
douchebags.
(I'm saying that it's not okay to call them douchebags; I
understand that the First Amendment gives me the right to call them
douchebags whether or not they're acting that way.)
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:39PM|#
But calling the specific policeman in question a racist --
as Gates did -- absolutely does NOT qualify, because it is an
insult to that specific individual.
He's a specific individual drawing a government paycheck, which
makes it political speech to accuse him of racism.
If I stand on my porch saying that Obama is a racist, he's a
specific named individual and it's definitely an insult, but it's
also political speech.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:42PM|#
I'm trying to argue that if you scream at a cop long enough,
even if you're standing in your very own house, the cop might just
arrest you. Not tase you or beat you, but put you in handcuffs and
take you for a squad-car ride. It's terrible and it's awful, and
it's also quite preventable if you're not a complete
jackass.
Right, this is another variant of what you've already said.
I asked you if you thought this was good.
I guess I would also ask you if you think this is a legitimate use
of the laws as they currently stand.
I'm not asking you if you think it's inevitable or if you think I
should expect it. I'm asking if you think it's legally correct, and
I'm asking if you think it's good and desirable.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 4:42PM|#
To defend Gates' behavior, you only have to believe that he
should be allowed to speak freely in his own home in the middle of
the day.
No. To defend Gates against the charge of disorderly conduct you
have to believe that people have a legal right to say whatever they
want within their own homes. You also need to ignore the fact that
he left his house and followed the cop outside, of course, but I'll
overlook that.
But to defend Gates' behavior you need to believe
not only that people have the right to say anything that they want
within their house, but that anything they say within their house
is above reproach. But I suspect that if a black cop came into my
house because he thought I was a burglar and I said "who let this
goddamned nigger into my living room" and kept screaming "get out
of my house, nigger" at him you wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the
idea that I owed him an apology -- even IF he "wrongly" arrested me
for saying it.
|7.23.09 @ 4:43PM|#
Not tase you or beat you, but put you in handcuffs and take
you for a squad-car ride. It's terrible and it's awful, and it's
also quite preventable if you're not a complete jackass.
"You know that girl that got raped after walking down the street in
provocative clothes? It was terrible and awful, and she could have
prevented it by wearing a sweatsuit."
|7.23.09 @ 4:43PM|#
Saying that the police as an organization are treating him
poorly because of his race would be protected speech because it
doesn't target an individual. But calling the specific policeman in
question a racist -- as Gates did -- absolutely does NOT qualify,
because it is an insult to that specific individual.
What are you referring to here? The police report says that Gates
responded to the request to step out on the porch with "Why?
Because I'm a black man in America?" Wow, fighting words indeed,
eh? This is exactly the same as modern fighting words cases in
which a defendant is arrested for cursing, spitting, and violently
threatening police officers in a public square. Yeah, completely
analogous.
Dan, seriously, what exact words do you think count as "fightin
words," and how could the police officer have reasonably thought
that this old guy with a cane who refused to step out on the porch
was actually inciting violence -- among the "public," no les? It's
preposterous, which is exactly why the police dropped the charges
the next day.
No, you can't arrested (legally) for criticizing the police. And
making a comment about being discriminated against for being "black
in America" is the essence of protected speech. This shouldn't even
be a question.
Charles|7.23.09 @ 4:43PM|#
Other than that, many of the commenters here simply are saying that
the police piss them off. Fine. But just because many police abuse
their authority, and further because the law gives them too much
authority to begin with, doesn't mean that it's okay to "call them
douchbags" and the like, particularly if they're not acting like
douchebags.
(I'm saying that it's not okay to call them douchebags; I
understand that the First Amendment gives me the right to call them
douchebags whether or not they're acting that way.)
The problem here is that I can call somebody a douchebag all day
(in fact, I have done that in college). But when the police (who
work for the people! It's not like they are aliens, or a foreign
occupier, or spirits of the Righteous Lord) do something illegal
and improper, we should all be upset.
Okay, to change the direction a little bit. Everyone understands
that businesses commit fraud. But unless it's particularly
egregious or you've got some personal stake, you shouldn't be as
upset about corruption in business as you should be about
corruption in government.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:44PM|#
It's terrible and it's awful
Now that I read your post again, maybe I'm not getting you here.
Are you saying riding in a squad car is a terrible and awful
experience, or are you saying that arresting me is a terrible and
awful thing for the cop to do?
Because if you were trying to say the latter, then I guess you
answered my question. Thanks.
|7.23.09 @ 4:44PM|#
I agree, the cop is a Cartman like mega-asshole and Gates is
probably also a mini-asshole, but since being an asshole isn't
illegal he should not have been arrested.
But, - But, I say - why hasn't anyone commented on this:
Last night President Obama said he didn't know "what role race played" in last week's arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates at his home in Cambridge.
If Obama doesn't know, then why the fuck is he even talking about
it on national TV. He is the fucking president of the United
States. Nothing he says is trivial, even when it really is trivial.
The POTUS's farts are news. If Obama doesn't know about something
he need to STFU! Of course, if he took this advice we'd start to
think Obama was mute, but that is a different matter
altogether.
I probably should not complain about Obama blathering on about Cop
vs Gates-gate cause the issue has wiped Obama's Health Care speech
off the news.
robc|7.23.09 @ 4:49PM|#
But I suspect that if a black cop came into my house because
he thought I was a burglar and I said "who let this goddamned
nigger into my living room" and kept screaming "get out of my
house, nigger" at him you wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea
that I owed him an apology -- even IF he "wrongly" arrested me for
saying it.
You suspect wrongly.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 4:49PM|#
Right, it wouldn't make sense. Because the point is that I
don't think she would have called at all if they were
white.
So your position is that it is reasonable to assume that a white
person is racist if she assumes two black guys are burglars, it
"wouldn't make sense" to suspect a black person of racism for
assuming two *white* guys were burglars.
Interesting that you can't seem to see past the race of the
accuser.
Tacos mmm...|7.23.09 @ 4:49PM|#
The latter. It sets back progress in race relations when folks like gates pull this shit. And of course, that's exactly why he does it. Racial harmony threatens his life's work.
Gates is not Al Sharpton. Dr. Gates has built is career on literary
deconstruction and academic studies of African American culture, as
well as his formidable talents as a lecturer. If we all started
holding hands and singing Kumbaya tomorrow, he would still hold a
job.
That being said, if you automatically assume every black public
figure is a race-baiter, he probably has a good point.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 4:52PM|#
You suspect wrongly.
If you don't think the described behavior requires an apology then
your parents failed to teach you how to behave properly. That's a
problem commonly found in libertarian circles, alas; too many
people lack the ability to distinguish "you have the right to do
that" from "it is right for you to do that".
|7.23.09 @ 4:54PM|#
But to defend Gates' behavior you need to believe not only
that people have the right to say anything that they want within
their house, but that anything they say within their house is above
reproach. But I suspect that if a black cop came into my house
because he thought I was a burglar and I said "who let this
goddamned nigger into my living room" and kept screaming "get out
of my house, nigger" at him you wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the
idea that I owed him an apology -- even IF he "wrongly" arrested me
for saying it.
No one has alleged that Gates made any racial slurs. Again, bad
analogy.
robc|7.23.09 @ 4:54PM|#
Dan,
I have, on this site, defended Lester Maddox, who is a racist fuck.
He was absolutely within his rights to have a white-only
restaurant. And to defend it against trespassers with axe handles.
Still a racist fuck though.
robc|7.23.09 @ 4:55PM|#
too many people lack the ability to distinguish "you have the right
to do that" from "it is right for you to do that".
You clearly havent read many of my posts. :)
|7.23.09 @ 4:55PM|#
"Because the point is that I don't think she would have
called at all if they were white."
Has it been established that the caller was white? Just asking or
is this something else everyone is assuming and talking about even
though they do not know?
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:56PM|#
it "wouldn't make sense" to suspect a black person of racism
for assuming two *white* guys were burglars.
When did I say that? Actually, I don't think a black person would
have assumed that two white guys were burglars, when all the other
factors are held constant. Or, at least, if we tested people
randomly using the same house, same cab, same luggage, but merely
switched the race of the people involved, white people would
mistake black people for burglars a lot more often than black
people would mistake white people for burglars.
Interesting that you can't seem to see past the race of the
accuser.
Well, the accuser was white. And she WAS incorrect. She looked at a
situation and drew the wrong conclusion. So we are entitled to ask
ourselves, "Why did she draw the wrong conclusion?" and "Would she
have been as likely to draw the wrong conclusion if the two men she
saw were white?" And if the answers are: "Because she's afraid of
black people" and "No" then her call to the police was motivated at
least in part by racism.
JB|7.23.09 @ 4:58PM|#
Right, it wouldn't make sense. Because the point is that I
don't think she would have called at all if they were white. She
would have looked at the other factors in the scene and deduced
that it wasn't a criminal break in.
Fluffy, you are making some huge assumptions there. It's not likely
the lady in question saw them getting out of the limo, etc. She
probably was walking by and all she saw was two guys breaking a
door down. Who cares what race they are? That's suspicious no
matter what race they are.
robc|7.23.09 @ 4:58PM|#
Dan,
I think I kinda missed your point but you missed mine. Yeah, you
called a cop a "nigger" probably requires an apology. But, I think
the arrest more than offsets that. Im not fucking apologizing to
anyone who falsely arrests me. Fuck that shit.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 4:59PM|#
Just asking or is this something else everyone is assuming
and talking about even though they do not know?
Her name was released early [and then the police attempted to
redact it from subsequent releases of the police report] and she
was identified as a white female employee of Harvard. But my only
sources on that are commenters at the Boston Globe and [I think]
the Crimson, so it's admittedly flimsy.
robc|7.23.09 @ 5:00PM|#
Dan,
My point, that you missed, is that Im not even considering what the
right thing to do is, Im only concerned with Gates's rights. His
behavior is between him and God.
robc|7.23.09 @ 5:01PM|#
Im not fucking apologizing to anyone who falsely arrests me.
Fuck that shit.
No wait, that isnt true. I would apologize after they resign from
the force.
JB|7.23.09 @ 5:01PM|#
That being said, if you automatically assume every black
public figure is a race-baiter, he probably has a good
point.
Tacos, it's fairly obvious this guy is a race-baiter (or race
masturbater as I put it) because of his comments on this incident.
Instead of making it about police power and abuse, he made it all
about race from the time of incident until today. How many people
get threatened or charged with disorderly conduct for yelling and
screaming in public? A lot. He isn't special.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 5:01PM|#
Fluffy, you are making some huge assumptions there. It's not
likely the lady in question saw them getting out of the limo,
etc
OK, that's fair. I'm assuming the cab was visible in the vicinity.
You're pointing out that we don't know that.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 5:02PM|#
Dan, seriously, what exact words do you think count as
"fightin words,"
Sure. Right after you provide an exact list of what objects can
constitute deadly weapons.
Or, alternatively, you could read what I've written above and do a
little research into the fighting words doctrine. One thing you
should keep in mind is that a big reason for the doctrine is that
"fighting words" run the risk of inciting violence in their
*target*. The reason why it is, for example, illegal for me to
follow black men up and down the street saying "go back to Africa
you effin' niggers" is that I'm inciting THEM to attack ME. The law
recognizes -- even though Libertarians don't -- that human beings
are not mindless automatons, and that you can make almost anybody
physically violent if you verbally provoke them enough.
and how could the police officer have reasonably thought that
this old guy with a cane who refused to step out on the porch was
actually inciting violence
I'll ignore the fact that 58 is not "old" and simply ask you to
explain why you think there is any correlation at all between
physical fitness and the ability to *incite* violent behavior in
others.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 5:07PM|#
Im not fucking apologizing to anyone who falsely arrests me.
Fuck that shit.
So apparently two wrongs DID make a right in your household.
Anyway, it is only a false arrest if the police report falsely
reports Gates' behavior during the encounter. That does not appear
to be the case, based on the other witnesses who have come
forward.
hmm|7.23.09 @ 5:13PM|#
I still don't see what race had to do with this from the stand
point of wrongful arrest. There is more than likely a race issue
with who ever called the police. But from what I read of the
incident there is no overt or even hinted racism on behalf of the
cop. The guy was pissed someone called, the cop got mad the guy was
mad and taking it out on him. The cop is a fuck tard, the guy that
got mad had at least some reason to do so if nothing more than some
assclown called the cops. (I would be, but I get pissy when cops
are within 100 feet of me) The fact the cop acted the way he did is
a violation of a mans rights, the fact Gates acted the way he did
is simple a pissed off guy venting.
I'd think an officer was racist long before I thought one wasn't.
(regardless of race of the officer) The more important issue of a
cop acting out is being glossed over by a race issue. It's almost
as bad as hate crimes, who cares why the cop did it. He did it.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 5:15PM|#
No one has alleged that Gates made any racial slurs. Again,
bad analogy.
If you can point to a Supreme Court case holding that personal
slurs fall outside the fighting words doctrine so long as they
aren't racial, I'll accept your claim that the analogy is a bad
one.
But your belief that we should distinguish between slurs that
target a person's race (e.g., "nigger") and slurs that target their
character (e.g., "racist") isn't reflected in American law. Nor
should it be, in my opinion; insults to my race wouldn't bother me
nearly as much as insults to my character. I could not care less
about my race, but my character matters to me.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 5:15PM|#
One thing you should keep in mind is that a big reason for
the doctrine is that "fighting words" run the risk of inciting
violence in their *target*.
Well, then, I would automatically reject the entire concept of
fighting words out of hand, but do so doubly if the "target" is a
law enforcement officer drawing a government paycheck.
It's really simple: there are no words, none, of any kind,
in any combination, that make it reasonable for a law enforcement
officer to become violent. Other than words that indicate that I'm
committing some other crime, like "I have a lady's decapitated head
here in my bag".
You're right, LEO's aren't mindless automatons. They're people who
should be thinking, at literally every second, about the limits of
their powers as LEO's.
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 5:17PM|#
Anyway, it is only a false arrest if the police report
falsely reports Gates' behavior during the encounter.
Or if the behavior described in the police report could not
reasonably be interpreted to fall under the statute.
If a police report reads, "I saw the suspect sitting in a park
reading a book, so I arrested him for murder," it wouldn't really
matter if the report was accurately describing the suspect's
behavior.
hmm|7.23.09 @ 5:18PM|#
Here's some
straight up, "OMG YOU HATE BLACK PEOPLE" race baiting commentary
video.
Warning about some inappropriate language.
article to
accompany video
|7.23.09 @ 5:26PM|#
No, Dan, I mean identify which words Gates spoke that constitute
"fighting words." As I've said above, Gates didn't make any racial
slurs, and nothing he said fits into existing precedent. You can't
just bring up the "fighting words" doctine and then argue, without
facts or any reference to analogous precedent, that Gates' conduct
would trigger this exceptionally narrow carve-out to the 1st
Amendment. The charges that have been upheld under the "fighting
words" doctrine are quite extreme, and so my challenge to you
remains: what did Gates say that constitutes "fighting words"? And
do Gates' words and conduct really fit into this doctrine?
Also, regarding your comment that "fighting words" need only have
likelihood of inciting violence in their target, this is only
partially true. It's true with respect to public comments that tend
to incite members of the public at which they're directed.
However, the notion that a police officer himself might be incited
to violence, is not, as far as I know, a part of the law. I think
it's reasonable to assume that police will not become violent due
to personal slights.
robc|7.23.09 @ 5:29PM|#
Or if the behavior described in the police report could not
reasonably be interpreted to fall under the statute.
And we know it didnt, becuase they dropped the charges.
Tacos mmm...|7.23.09 @ 5:29PM|#
Tacos, it's fairly obvious this guy is a race-baiter (or race masturbater as I put it) because of his comments on this incident. Instead of making it about police power and abuse, he made it all about race from the time of incident until today. How many people get threatened or charged with disorderly conduct for yelling and screaming in public? A lot. He isn't special.
I was responding to the comment that stated Dr. Gate's career
depended on race-baiting, which is far from the case.
I think that he is over-inflating the racial aspects of what
happened to him, but he's not doing it with the two-faced manner
that the Sharptons and Jacksons of the world have - I think that
he's genuinely upset, and geniunely believes he was the victim of
discrimination. Whether he's correct or not is arguable, but I
don't believe he's a huckster.
|7.23.09 @ 5:30PM|#
One more thing, Dan. The political prong of the Chaplinsky test has been expanded considerably since the 1940s. Even vaguely political language (including racially charged language) has been found to express protected political views. I doubt that Chaplinsky is good law for anything besides obscenity or outright calls to violence at this point.
robc|7.23.09 @ 5:35PM|#
So apparently two wrongs DID make a right in your
household.
Who said anything about anything being right?
Tacos mmm...|7.23.09 @ 5:35PM|#
You're right, LEO's aren't mindless automatons. They're people who should be thinking, at literally every second, about the limits of their powers as LEO's.
They do. But unfortunately, they only view those limits as things
they have to use tricks to get around.
Like "this guy isn't being respectful enough to me, but I can't
arrest him for anything in his house... maybe if I can lure him
outside..."
Tacos mmm...|7.23.09 @ 5:40PM|#
OK, that's fair. I'm assuming the cab was visible in the vicinity. You're pointing out that we don't know that.
It's a reasonable assumption, though, since if you look at Gate's
house in Google street view, the curb is about ten feet from the
front door. The woman reported that two people were trying to get
into the house, ergo the driver (and the vehicle at the curb) were
still there.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 5:46PM|#
Ouch! Them Jap swords is sharp. Okay, lessee here...
Thanks.
You're welcome, Fluffy. It's the least I can do after all the
consideration and good faith you've shown me. A pleasant day and
happy deep-throating to you as well.
I think being an asshole to a cop isn't an arrestable offense.
That is one fine theory, Charles. I strongly encourage you give it
try at your earliest convenience and report back your
findings.
P.S. I done heerd thet gettin' arrested for
hollerin' in a cop's face is jest like gettin' raped for walkin'
down the street lookin' purty, hyuck, hyuck.
P.P.S.
Typical Asshole Pig (Whose Face I'd Totally Fucking Get Into If He
Tried That Shit with Me) Teaches Course on How to Avoid Racial
Profiling, Like the Sneaky Fascist Thug He Is
JB|7.23.09 @ 5:47PM|#
I think that he is over-inflating the racial aspects of what
happened to him...
I agree on that, and that he isn't nearly as bad as Sharpton and
Jackson. But I think he has already made things worse for black
people with his actions and statements.
JB|7.23.09 @ 5:51PM|#
It's a reasonable assumption, though, since if you look at
Gate's house in Google street view, the curb is about ten feet from
the front door. The woman reported that two people were trying to
get into the house, ergo the driver (and the vehicle at the curb)
were still there.
Not really. From what I read, the driver was described as a 'limo
driver' so what that likely translates to was a sedan car that was
most likely parked near-by. Most people when seeing two men
breaking down a door aren't going to think, "hmmm, let me see if
there is car that could conceivably be a cab nearby and that will
explain everything."
People casting aspersions on the caller are being goofy. If it was
one of Gate's immediate neighbors, then I could see the caller
being questioned for not recognizing her neighbor, but apart from
that she did what any citizen should do.
|7.23.09 @ 5:51PM|#
I think being an asshole to a cop isn't an arrestable
offense.
That is one fine theory, Charles. I strongly encourage you give it
try at your earliest convenience and report back your
findings.
Jim, you're missing the point. We all know that being an asshole to
a cop is likely to get you arrested. The point is that its not
illegal to be an asshole to a cop, and so you shouldn't get
arrested for doing it.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 5:55PM|#
Now I'm seeing reports that Gates refused to show ID when
requested.
Does that change things any? I was under the impression that
refusing the reasonable request of a police officer was kind of a
no-no. And asking you to prove that you do indeed live in the house
you just broke into would seem to be a reasonable request.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 5:57PM|#
The point is that its not illegal to be an asshole to a cop, and so you shouldn't get arrested for doing it.
Is it illegal to refuse to show identification, and then yell at
the cop who asks for it?
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 6:01PM|#
I'm just trying to put myself in the fascist pig's jackboots: I
get a report of a break-in. I get there and confront the guy, he
says he lives there but he won't show me ID, he says I'm a
chickenshit racist and get the fuck off his property and whatnot,
etc. It might very well be that he's very loud and hostile. What, I
should just call it a day?
Why even have cops?
|7.23.09 @ 6:02PM|#
It is illegal to act in contempt of cop. You will be arrested
and detained. Sure, maybe charges will be dropped... but,
hey.
Let's give the government enough power and maybe, when the right
people are in charge, we'll finally have improved ourselves to
perfection.
|7.23.09 @ 6:07PM|#
"Is it illegal to refuse to show identification, and then yell
at the cop who asks for it?"
When the authorities say "papers, please", you have a
responsibility to give them your papers.
Only the guilty need fear!
hmm|7.23.09 @ 6:17PM|#
Why even have cops?
Good point. Although not the point I think you were aiming for.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 6:18PM|#
When the authorities say "papers, please", you have a responsibility to give them your papers.
So if somebody broke into your house and told the cops he lived
there, you wouldn't want them to double-check.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 6:19PM|#
Good point. Although not the point I think you were aiming for.
I know, dude, Anarchy in the USA!
hmm|7.23.09 @ 6:21PM|#
I was under the impression that refusing the reasonable
request of a police officer was kind of a no-no.
On my own property? Bullshit. Police officer can ask anything he
wants when standing on my porch and I will gladly tell him to piss
off unless he is willing to take custody of me. First ask, "Am I
free to go." until he says yes. Then tell him to leave and buh
bye.
There are states with self identification laws on the books. I do
not think any require production of a state ID. Here there is no
law concerning self identification.
hmm|7.23.09 @ 6:22PM|#
I know, dude, Anarchy in the USA!
Far from it. I'd say recent actions by police are a close second to
anarchy. Not accountable to anyone for anything.
hmm|7.23.09 @ 6:24PM|#
For the record after he takes investigative custody I'll feed him 5th lines all day. Oddly most cops freak as soon as you ask, "Am I free to go." It's pounded into their head in academy that a no reply means they have custody.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 6:26PM|#
On my own property? Bullshit.
You know it's your own property. They don't.
They're trying to protect your property. The neighbor saw
somebody break in. Now the cops are Der Geshhhhtapo for verifying
your identity before they apologize for the trouble and wish you a
good day?
Far from it. I'd say recent actions by police are a close second to anarchy. Not accountable to anyone for anything.
Very dramatic. I can almost hear the clack of the jackboots.
|7.23.09 @ 6:27PM|#
Sure, I'd want them to double check.
After it begins to sink in on them that they just asked for the
papers of a citizen in his or her own home, I'd want them to
apologize for the inconvenience and GTFO.
I'd also want them to have thick enough skin to deal with uppity
folk who are upset that they got asked to provide their
papers.
I'd also want to live in a country where Joe Blow was seen as a
fellow citizen by the Security Forces rather than as a subject of
the government.
Barring that, I'd like to live in one where my fellow citizens see
Joe Blow as one rather than as a subject.
The White Devil|7.23.09 @ 6:31PM|#
Today, Obama said that with all that's going on in the country
with health care and the economy and the wars abroad, "it doesn't
make sense to arrest a guy in his own home if he's not causing a
serious disturbance."
Translation: never pass up an opportunity to use a good crisis.
Especially when I need take people's eyes off of my tanking
support.
Jim Treacher|7.23.09 @ 6:32PM|#
After it begins to sink in on them that they just asked for the papers of a citizen in his or her own home, I'd want them to apologize for the inconvenience and GTFO.
Which may or may not be what happened here.
I'd also want them to have thick enough skin to deal with uppity folk who are upset that they got asked to provide their papers.
It's good to want things.
I'd also want to live in a country where Joe Blow was seen as a fellow citizen by the Security Forces rather than as a subject of the government.
Wait. You didn't remove your tracking chip, did you? They always
put in a backup! And you're really not gonna wanna dig it out of
there.
|7.23.09 @ 6:33PM|#
Listen to the interview on Imus for "the rest of the story". There had been numerous daytime breakins in that neighborhood. Person calling in the report was being a GOOD nosy neighbor......cop was responding. all gates had to do was act respectfully to a law enforcement officer and asnwer the questions to clear up the matter. But he WANTED a controversy for this very reason.....people are talking about it still...me included.
hmm|7.23.09 @ 6:43PM|#
I don't need or want their protection. The trade off has gotten
too high, hell it's been too high.
As soon as the man named identified himself it takes the officer
less than 5 minutes to know his height, weight, eye color,
residence, and warrants. At that point the officer had a duty to
get off his property, unless the man invited him to stay.
Regardless of what the guy called him. I don't care about his race
or the race issue. The issue is a man was arrested on his own
property, after identifying himself, for saying mean things. That
is bullshit and indefensible. Probably why the charges were
dropped.
I heard the officer was unwilling to provide secondary ID and self
identify. Is he in the right or is it just officers that need to
know who they are dealing with?
The Gobbler|7.23.09 @ 6:45PM|#
You know Chuck Schumer wants to fingerprint every worker in
America.
And all you people can do is worry about some race baiting
nigger.
Schumer Details Fingerprint Plan to Verify US Workers'
Identity:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/schumer_details_fingerprint_plan_to_verify_us_workers_identity/
Fluffy|7.23.09 @ 7:04PM|#
Now I'm seeing reports that Gates refused to show ID when
requested.
Does that change things any? I was under the impression that
refusing the reasonable request of a police officer was kind of a
no-no. And asking you to prove that you do indeed live in the house
you just broke into would seem to be a reasonable
request.
Read the police report. Crowley does not dispute that Gates showed
him ID [grudgingly]. Crowley also admits that he had already
concluded Gates resided in the house.
The ID issue was long-settled by the time this incident escalated.
Crowley makes no claim that Gates did anything other than be rude
to him and demand his name. Crowley simply asserts that as soon as
Gates did these things on the porch instead of inside the house, he
was fair game for arrest.
|7.23.09 @ 7:12PM|#
Gates was clearly in the wrong and should have given the info to the authority figure. I have to side with the cops on this one and it was backed up by his partner. Just trying to place the race card....cops are damned if they show up and damned if they don't.
TallDave|7.23.09 @ 7:41PM|#
By the meaning of "disorderly conduct," he clearly should have
been arrested.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorderly_conduct
A typical statutory definition of disorderly conduct, in this case Indiana's, defines the offense in this way:
A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally:
(1) engages in fighting or in tumultuous conduct;
(2) makes unreasonable noise and continues to do so after being asked to stop; or
(3) disrupts a lawful assembly of persons;
If you scream at someone, cop or not, on your front porch in a
suburban neighborhood, you are disturbing the peace, because it's
an unreasonable noise. You will be warned, and then arrested if you
are too stupid to stop when the police tell you to.
People living in the neighborhood have a right not to be disturbed
by screaming lunatics.
|7.23.09 @ 9:19PM|#
TallDave,
First of all, that's not the language of the Mass statute. Second,
because this type of law runs up against the First Amendment
(incorporated into the 14th Amendment) and analogous state
constitutions, courts typically construe these statutes extremely
narrowly.
The Mass law targets:
"Common night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female,
common railers and brawlers, persons who with offensive and
disorderly acts or language accost or annoy persons of the opposite
sex, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior,
idle and disorderly persons, disturbers of the peace, keepers of
noisy and disorderly houses, and persons guilty of indecent
exposure."
This is mostly an obscenity law, and in fact, relevant modern First
Amendment law protects almost every type of speech besides
obscenity and words that incite violence ("fighting words." The
latter category is extremely narrow.
Courts in Mass have reduced the scope of the above provisions such
that they only really pertain to speech likely to incite violence
by the public (riots, etc.). So yes, you have every right to say
mean things to the cops.
Sorry to bust up your authoritarian fantasy.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 9:56PM|#
Well, then, I would automatically reject the entire concept
of fighting words out of hand, but do so doubly if the "target" is
a law enforcement officer drawing a government paycheck.
And when this becomes a Fluffyocracy, that will matter. But since
police enforce the law and the fighting words doctrine is a
long-established part of that law, you cannot claim that a
policeman was derelict in his duty in arresting a verbally abusive
man for disturbing the peace.
Dan|7.23.09 @ 9:58PM|#
"Anyway, it is only a false arrest if the police report
falsely reports Gates' behavior during the encounter."
Or if the behavior described in the police report could not
reasonably be interpreted to fall under the statute.
Well, certainly. But since it is obvious that the described
behavior does fall under the statute, I didn't bother mentioned
that.
anarch|7.23.09 @ 10:06PM|#
From the
NY Times:
''What we don't need is public safety officials across the country second-guessing themselves,'' said David Holway, president of the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, which represents 15,000 public safety officials around the country.
And prithee, Mr. Holway, why ever
not?
Dan|7.23.09 @ 10:18PM|#
I was under the impression that refusing the reasonable
request of a police officer was kind of a no-no.
On my own property? Bullshit.
And how, exactly, is the cop supposed to know it is "your own
property"? They get a burglary call, they find a guy in the house,
he refuses to identify himself. You're saying the appropriate
police response at that point is to shrug and walk away?
How would anyone EVER get arrested for burglary in a world that
worked that way?
|7.23.09 @ 10:19PM|#
>>>>Let's say Gates did initially refuse to show his ID (an unsurprising response from an innocent man confronted by police in his own home).
|7.23.09 @ 11:00PM|#
Worst thread ever.
Gates owes no man an apology. I can't imagine why any black man in
America - especially a Harvard professor - would not have an
attitude about the police.
"The government ... wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no,
no. Not 'God Bless America.' God Damn America! That's in the Bible,
for killing innocent people. God Damn America for treating her
citizen as less than human. God Damn America as long as she keeps
trying to act like she is God and she is supreme!"
Dan|7.24.09 @ 12:55AM|#
Gates owes no man an apology. I can't imagine why any black
man in America - especially a Harvard professor - would not have an
attitude about the police.
If black men in America acted like Gates, the old racist stereotype
of blacks as foolish and impulsive would actually be true.
|7.24.09 @ 4:18AM|#
STUPID is a good word for the behavior of the Cambridge Police
and their Union.
Is it BRILLIANT to defend policies that lead to a police
state:
"In the USA we can be arrested for EXPRESSION in your own place" -
tired American >:|
|7.24.09 @ 4:22AM|#
I totally agree with the #2
"Screaming at a cop on your own private property should be a
national pastime." - kilroy
sri|7.24.09 @ 10:40PM|#
Wow!! I never thought that this will be such a big news. It went
from Gates arrest to Obama apalogy. This has become more
interesting than what I thought. So, I collected all the sites or
articles (more than 250 sites or articles) related to this hot
topic "Cambridge Police Unit Demands Apology from Obama". If you
are interested take a look at news, video coverage, people views
and reviews on this topic at the below link.
http://markthispage.blogspot.com/2009/07/all-about-cambridge-police-unit-demands.html
|7.25.09 @ 2:07AM|#
If someone is forcing their way into your house with a crowbar,
would you want the police to come? If the intruder told them he
lived there, would you want the cops to say "Oh, okay!" and leave?
If the intruder showed them an ID which didn't give an address,
would you want the cops to leave?
And the president was an idiot for butting in when he didn't have
the facts, regardless of whether the cop was following procedure or
not. The cop was chosen by the black department head to teach a
racial profiling class, so I doubt if he's the redneck racist that
you people are claiming.
Jim Treacher|7.25.09 @ 2:33AM|#
Let's say Gates did initially refuse to show his ID (an unsurprising response from an innocent man confronted by police in his own home).
Who were there to protect his property.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245