The More Things Change....

[TC]

Jul 26, 2009 10:11:33 GMT -5 GIGAFAN99 said:

No matter what text analysis we do on the answer to the question, when you segue from "police acted stupidly" to a discussion of racial profiling, you're making the connection between this incident and racial profiling. That's clearly how anyone would take his words. So yes, he did comment on the incident in the context of race relations.

"Tieing the incident to race" and commenting on the issue in the context of race relations are two different things. You need to make the accusation that Crowley acted on race to do the first.

To deny that race had nothing to do with this incident is foolish. Gates overreacted to Crowley because of race. Crowley overreacted to Gates because Gates called him a racist. The incident has everything to do with race relations even if it had nothing to do about racism.

[kchoya]

Jul 26, 2009 12:30:58 GMT -5 TC said:

Jul 26, 2009 10:11:33 GMT -5 GIGAFAN99 said:

No matter what text analysis we do on the answer to the question, when you segue from "police acted stupidly" to a discussion of racial profiling, you're making the connection between this incident and racial profiling. That's clearly how anyone would take his words. So yes, he did comment on the incident in the context of race relations.

"Tieing the incident to race" and commenting on the issue in the context of race relations are two different things. You need to make the accusation that Crowley acted on race to do the first.

To deny that race had nothing to do with this incident is foolish. Gates overreacted to Crowley because of race. Crowley overreacted to Gates because Gates called him a racist. The incident has everything to do with race relations even if it had nothing to do about racism.

1. I disagree Crowley overreacted.

2. How do you know Gates was arrested because he called the cop a racist? You don't think screaming and yelling and acting strangely was enough. Do you honestly think Gates would not have been arrested if he had not played the race card?

[TC]

Jul 26, 2009 12:51:25 GMT -5 kchoya said:

2. How do you know Gates was arrested because he called the cop a racist? You don't think screaming and yelling and acting strangely was enough. Do you honestly think Gates would not have been arrested if he had not played the race card?

The "you're a racist statements" occur both in Crowley and Figueroa's reports. The alternative is that Gates was arrested because Gates told Crowley "I'll talk to your momma outside", and that's just stupid - I'm giving Crowley the benefit of the doubt here because "you're a racist" is a statement that puts people on the defensive and "I'll talk to your momma outside" is one that makes people laugh at the old person yelling it.

[AvantGuardHoya]

Jul 26, 2009 11:39:25 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Jul 26, 2009 4:29:22 GMT -5 AvantGuardHoya said:

The more things change....

Thank you for such a meaningful contribution. Of course, what more could one expect from a person who probably thinks this was racial profiling.

Nothing I've said in this thread suggests I thought this was racial profiling. Nothing. My primary point is that several people, including you, are out at sea when it comes to matters related to race from the African American perspective. You've not walked a mile in my shoes. For the majority of us this dust up is reflective of a long standing problem that many white Americans cannot wrap their heads around. That's why it's a teachable moment. Racial profiling or not, maybe someone will get an insight as a result.

[theexorcist]

Jul 27, 2009 3:50:13 GMT -5 AvantGuardHoya said:

Jul 26, 2009 11:39:25 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Thank you for such a meaningful contribution. Of course, what more could one expect from a person who probably thinks this was racial profiling.

Nothing I've said in this thread suggests I thought this was racial profiling. Nothing. My primary point is that several people, including you, are out at sea when it comes to matters related to race from the African American perspective. You've not walked a mile in my shoes. For the majority of us this dust up is reflective of a long standing problem that many white Americans cannot wrap their heads around. That's why it's a teachable moment. Racial profiling or not, maybe someone will get an insight as a result.

That's a cop-out. It's using the excuse of racism - a real problem to this day in the United States - to justify any claim thereto, whether or not it was caused by it.

If you don't think it was racial profiling, then you shouldn't find any reason for this to be a teachable moment. If you think that Gates was justified in claiming racism when there wasn't any, then you give ammunition to every racist who thinks that allegations of police racism - anywhere, at any time - are all a bunch of hooey.

I haven't walked a mile in your shoes, but I'm darn sure that ascribing false motives to someone is a bad thing, and it can't be excused with a simple "it's OK because it's happened elsewhere".

[Boz]

When this story first broke, I was pretty critical of the neighbor who called 911. Well, technically, I said I'd be pretty ticked if I was Gates and my neighbor called 911 on me.

I feel like I need to retract that as more details come out. My thought of "neighbor" would be someone who know the people who live around them, but I guess Ms. Whalen & Prof. Gates do not know each other at all. So there's one thing. Also, Gates has stated that she acted appropriately and he is appreciative that she thought to call the police when it looked like someone was breaking into his home.

And more details have come out now I guess which further serve to vindicate the neighbor...or, more accurately demonstrate that she doesn't really have anything she needs to be vindicated for.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/27/AR2009072700470.html?hpid=topnews

This doesn't affect the larger issue which has been discussed that much, IMO. As most people here have opined, there was never really any racial "profiling" involved here to begin with.

But for what it's worth, I think I owe the neighbor an apology and, like others, probably should have waited to learn more before casting my judgment on her.

[Elvado]

Boz: You need not apologize at all. Rather, you should invite her over for a beer and pretend to mediate a situation you made worse.

[Filo]

Jul 27, 2009 9:59:04 GMT -5 theexorcist said:

Jul 27, 2009 3:50:13 GMT -5 AvantGuardHoya said:

Nothing I've said in this thread suggests I thought this was racial profiling. Nothing. My primary point is that several people, including you, are out at sea when it comes to matters related to race from the African American perspective. You've not walked a mile in my shoes. For the majority of us this dust up is reflective of a long standing problem that many white Americans cannot wrap their heads around. That's why it's a teachable moment. Racial profiling or not, maybe someone will get an insight as a result.

That's a cop-out. It's using the excuse of racism - a real problem to this day in the United States - to justify any claim thereto, whether or not it was caused by it.

If you don't think it was racial profiling, then you shouldn't find any reason for this to be a teachable moment. If you think that Gates was justified in claiming racism when there wasn't any, then you give ammunition to every racist who thinks that allegations of police racism - anywhere, at any time - are all a bunch of hooey.

I haven't walked a mile in your shoes, but I'm darn sure that ascribing false motives to someone is a bad thing, and it can't be excused with a simple "it's OK because it's happened elsewhere".

Poll 100 African Americans and ask them whether they thought race was a factor in this incident and in the Philly pool incident. Poll 100 White Americans ask them whether they thought race was a factorin this incident and in the Philly pool incident. You will get far different results. Now unless you want to ascribe some sort of nefarious intent behind one group's responses, doesn't that show that there is still a great deal of work to be done on race relations, at least in terms of everyone understanding how views are shaped.

Seems like a there is a teachable moment in there, no?

[Elvado]

Yes. There is a teachable moment, but Obama is certainly not fit to teach it.

[kchoya]

Jul 27, 2009 11:45:49 GMT -5 Filo said:

Jul 27, 2009 9:59:04 GMT -5 theexorcist said:

That's a cop-out. It's using the excuse of racism - a real problem to this day in the United States - to justify any claim thereto, whether or not it was caused by it.

If you don't think it was racial profiling, then you shouldn't find any reason for this to be a teachable moment. If you think that Gates was justified in claiming racism when there wasn't any, then you give ammunition to every racist who thinks that allegations of police racism - anywhere, at any time - are all a bunch of hooey.

I haven't walked a mile in your shoes, but I'm darn sure that ascribing false motives to someone is a bad thing, and it can't be excused with a simple "it's OK because it's happened elsewhere".

Poll 100 African Americans and ask them whether they thought race was a factor in this incident and in the Philly pool incident. Poll 100 White Americans ask them whether they thought race was a factorin this incident and in the Philly pool incident. You will get far different results. Now unless you want to ascribe some sort of nefarious intent behind one group's responses, doesn't that show that there is still a great deal of work to be done on race relations, at least in terms of everyone understanding how views are shaped.

Seems like a there is a teachable moment in there, no?

Everyone keeps talking about a "teachable moment" but doesn't say what lesson there is to be learned. With respect to race, all I can see are two: (1) if you're a black man, play the race card no matter what; and (2) if you're a white officer, don't dare arrest a black man who's accused you of being a racist.

[jerseyhoya34]

Here's a matter I think we can all agree on. Gates had nothing to fear from a cop whose beer of choice is....wait for it...wait for it...Blue Moon.

tinyurl.com/nvqbse

[SSHoya]

Discrepancies between the 911 call and the police report.

abovethelaw.com/2009/07/gatesgate_caller_disputes_the.php#more

[TC]

"What do these suitcases have to do with anything?"

FACEPALM

[SSHoya]

As an atty, I wouldn't argue such a discrepancy is not material; however, it does call into question credibility of witnesses (i.e., what did the witness actually recall) and/or officer writing the report. Also, inferentially, the idea of "backpacks" versus "luggage" might imply a more youthful individual? IDK. Salient point is she denies she ever mentioned race in her 911 call.

Here's my teachable moment: 1) if you are interacting with a police officer, do NOT mouth off in anyway (whether your black, white, brown, yellow, gay) , and if you are the police officer 2) learn to have a thicker skin (you're supposed to be trained that way).


.

[Bando]

Since I mentioned him before, let me highlight Radley Balko's take on the matter. To him, the issue here isn't racial profiling, but contempt of cop:

This deference to police at the expense of the policed is misplaced. Put a government worker behind a desk and give him the power to regulate, and conservatives will wax at length about public choice theory, bureaucratic pettiness, and the trappings of power. And rightly so. But put a government worker behind a badge, strap a gun to his waist, and give him the power to detain, use force, and kill, and those lessons somehow no longer apply.

Police officers deserve the same courtesy we afford anyone else we encounter in public life—basic respect and civility. If they're investigating a crime, they deserve cooperation as required by law, and beyond that only to the extent to which the person with whom they're speaking is comfortable. Verbally disrespecting a cop may well be rude, but in a free society we can't allow it to become a crime, any more than we can criminalize criticism of the president, a senator, or the city council. There's no excuse for the harassment or arrest of those who merely inquire about their rights, who ask for an explanation of what laws they're breaking, or who photograph or otherwise document police officers on the job.

What we owe law enforcement is vigilant oversight and accountability, not mindless deference and capitulation. Whether or not Henry Louis Gates was racially profiled last week doesn't change any of that.

[SSHoya]

I agree with Bando. As an attorney who defended many law enforcement officials from allegations that attempted to convert "contempt of cop" into constitutional violations, I've often counselled my clients that going forward, being "nice" or walking away from someone who isn't, can headoff frivolous claims.

[kchoya]

Jul 27, 2009 14:55:02 GMT -5 Bando said:

Since I mentioned him before, let me highlight Radley Balko's take on the matter. To him, the issue here isn't racial profiling, but contempt of cop:

This deference to police at the expense of the policed is misplaced. Put a government worker behind a desk and give him the power to regulate, and conservatives will wax at length about public choice theory, bureaucratic pettiness, and the trappings of power. And rightly so. But put a government worker behind a badge, strap a gun to his waist, and give him the power to detain, use force, and kill, and those lessons somehow no longer apply.

Police officers deserve the same courtesy we afford anyone else we encounter in public life—basic respect and civility. If they're investigating a crime, they deserve cooperation as required by law, and beyond that only to the extent to which the person with whom they're speaking is comfortable. Verbally disrespecting a cop may well be rude, but in a free society we can't allow it to become a crime, any more than we can criminalize criticism of the president, a senator, or the city council. There's no excuse for the harassment or arrest of those who merely inquire about their rights, who ask for an explanation of what laws they're breaking, or who photograph or otherwise document police officers on the job.

What we owe law enforcement is vigilant oversight and accountability, not mindless deference and capitulation. Whether or not Henry Louis Gates was racially profiled last week doesn't change any of that.

Yes, but there's a big difference between mouthing off to a cop and expecting a cop to take a reasonable amount of flack as he investigates people, versus Gates acting "strangely" and in a manner disproportionate to the circumstances. I agree that we need not bow down before law enforcement officers (I'm very ACLU-ish in the respect), but I think Gates crossed some lines that made his arrest appropriate.

[Filo]

Jul 27, 2009 12:00:44 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Jul 27, 2009 11:45:49 GMT -5 Filo said:

Poll 100 African Americans and ask them whether they thought race was a factor in this incident and in the Philly pool incident. Poll 100 White Americans ask them whether they thought race was a factorin this incident and in the Philly pool incident. You will get far different results. Now unless you want to ascribe some sort of nefarious intent behind one group's responses, doesn't that show that there is still a great deal of work to be done on race relations, at least in terms of everyone understanding how views are shaped.

Seems like a there is a teachable moment in there, no?

Everyone keeps talking about a "teachable moment" but doesn't say what lesson there is to be learned. With respect to race, all I can see are two: (1) if you're a black man, play the race card no matter what; and (2) if you're a white officer, don't dare arrest a black man who's accused you of being a racist.

I can't help it if that is all that you can see.

I, and I am sure many others, see the point that I made and you ignored:

1. that reasonable people may have a very different take on a situation based on a multitude of factors, including their race, and

2. the causes of the differering interpretations of the same fact are worth exploring, rather than dismissing out of hand by gross generalizations such as "they are playing the race card."

[kchoya]

Jul 27, 2009 16:06:05 GMT -5 Filo said:

Jul 27, 2009 12:00:44 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Everyone keeps talking about a "teachable moment" but doesn't say what lesson there is to be learned. With respect to race, all I can see are two: (1) if you're a black man, play the race card no matter what; and (2) if you're a white officer, don't dare arrest a black man who's accused you of being a racist.

I can't help it if that is all that you can see.

I, and I am sure many others, see the point that I made and you ignored:

1. that reasonable people may have a very different take on a situation based on a multitude of factors, including their race, and

2. the causes of the differering interpretations of the same fact are worth exploring, rather than dismissing out of hand by gross generalizations such as "they are playing the race card."

I'm sorry if that's how you and a bunch of other people are going to view it. This is a situation where Gates cried wolf about being a black man being persecuted because of the color of his skin. If you're going to hold this incident up as an example of racism, then we're never going to get anywhere because we'll never be able to focus on true problems.

Gates did a big disservice by making this a racial issue when, by all objective indications, race appears not to be an issue. It is overreactions like this that are going to cause black people to continue to be suspicious of the police in instances where they need not be.

There's nothing to explore. Gates acting like an ass and blaming the whole thing on race is why people continue to have "differing interpretations."

[Boz]

I do not have any police training, but I am pretty sure that if I go to investigate a robbery, and the first thing that happens when I show up and ask a question is that the person in the house begins yelling at me and calling me a racist, well, I don't much care what that person looks like or how old he is or whether he's holding a cane (which, we should remember, is a potential weapon)....

...I'm pretty sure I'm going to be considering that person a possible danger and a threat right away.

A few points:

1. I am not saying that the above is definitely what happened, but it seems to be the officer's take on how it happened.

2. Even with all of the above, I don't know that an actual arrest is necessary (though the handcuffs may have been). I'm just saying, you act like that right off the bat, the cops are -- appropriately -- going to be on hyper alert to your behavior. It lends itself to reactions that some might deem excessive.

3. Balko's point is not lost on me, but I think it oversimplifies in the other direction. Yes, police officers have training and should be able to withstand some verbal "disrespect" without flying off the handle. On the other hand, how do you determine -- and how quickly can you determine -- when something is just mild disrespect, and when something is evidence of someone who is: altered, unbalanced, possibly a danger, etc.? When your job involves investigating criminal activity, which tends to have a lot more risk of injury or death than sitting behind a desk in an office, I think you are going to err on the side of safety more often than not.

And I really don't want to hear that Gates could not be considered dangerous because of his age or infirmity. Anyone who thinks that should never become a police officer. I think we all know, after the fact, that this man presented no real danger or threat to himself or others, but the officer has to make that determination on the scene, without knowing who the person is, whether there is a second person around, etc., so I'm inclined to cut him a little slack.

Having said all of this, I know it's not Gates' version of what happened. I guess I believe the officer more in this instance. If Gates' version (wherein he started off very polite, but became angry when he felt he was being treated badly and was not getting any answers to his questions) is the truth, believe me, that changes my opinion of this incident dramatically.