Obama, Gates, and Crowley Beer Summit a Snooze

This is what I forgot to post a link to, this story...

http://www.thefire.org/article/10918.html

Interesting.

Don't think they needed to go so far as to actually haul the caterwauling curmudgeon down to the station.

Note: Again, pardon the hogging of three post threads.

Angie Koutrotsios of IL 8:50PM August 04, 2009

As the always interesting General Colin Powell put it during a recent interview, where he was asked about this issue, all sides could have acted with more calm and collected heads.

First off, it is obvious that some racial issues still exist in America, although one cannot help but notice the wonderful progress that was evident on election night when Obama was announced president elect. Being from Illinois, where most of us voted for Obama (have voted for both Democratic as well as Republican candidates, depending on who was running), it is kind of hard to miss the progress, because there was just so much partying on election night! But to others, perhaps the progress was not so evident, especially if one is a scholar who studies racial issues and knows that negative incidents still do occur when it comes to police-civilian encounters.

That said, it is clear that with an African-American officer present at the scene, there was no "racial profiling" where that was the sole reason that anyone might have been out to get the Harvard professor, as he seemed to think. On the other hand, an elderly man who uses a cane, albeit one behaving loudly, is hardly a threat to the neighborhood peace! Both sides needed, as Colin Powell put it during his interview, some adult supervision to break it up.

What Obama seems to have done right, however, is not to just backtrack on his faux pas choice of words, before knowing all the facts, but to call in all sides so that he could listen to all sides, right there in person, after everyone had finally calmed down.

The only thing they could have done better was to invite the lady who initially made the concerned neighbor call in the first place, and who clearly didn't single anyone out by race. She had the coolest head of all, and yet it was the guys who got together for the beer thing. I think the calm and rational lady could have really provided some interesting opinions had she been invited to show up in the first place.

Finally, if people are concerned about the neighborhood, but are wary of sounding like they are "profiling," a simple "dark skin" or "light skin" description is race/ethnicity NEUTRAL.

Had it been me, and had the person had dark skin or light skin, that is clearly what I would have said, because it avoids any type of racial or ethnicity concerns, and yet still helps to accurately describe the person or persons in question.

People who live near the Equator may have very dark skin, but they may not be African-American, and likewise, I've seen a few Caucasians baked to the crisp in tanning beds, that from a distance, they, too, might be viewed as a different racial or ethnic group.

Simply state the skin tone and avoid ethnic or racial typing, if at all possible, if one is just too far away to really tell, for sure.

The lady who made the phone call did an excellent job at remaining objective and calm, and yet she was clearly missing at the jokingly named "beer summit."

It was a real shame that her insight was not sought out.

Expect to see her booked on "The View," though, because it is doubtful that Barbara Walters would miss out on the wonderful instance of calmness while making a call as a concerned neighbor.

Angie Koutrotsios of IL 8:08PM August 04, 2009

I receive a call about a burglary in progress, possibly involving two minorities. I am dispatched and arrive on scene. I am nervous and anxious, unsure of the situation. Is this a legitimate call? Is there someone actually robbing this house? Are they armed and willing to take my life if encountered? I am required to ensure the house is secure and the residents safe but I do not know who the owners are. I encounter a black man and I have no idea who he is. Is he the home owner? Is he the burglar? Is this guy going to shoot or stab me? I proceed to ask him to speak to me so I can further assess the situation to which he replies "no I will not". I am impressed with the patience displayed by Sgt Crowley. The moment this man declines to cooperate with me in this particular situation, I may have arrested him immediately for my safety. Imagine entering an unfamiliar residence on a possible burglary call and encountering a stranger. This is a very risky situation and now this man is refusing to cooperate? As far as arresting him for what occurred afterward, that would be at the discretion of the officer on scene. Disorderly conduct covers a wide variety of actions and events and may be interpreted differently from one town to another.

http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/districtcourt/jury-instructions/criminal/pdf/7160-disorderly-conduct.pdf

"It forbids tumultuous and highly agitated behavior, which may not involve physical violence, but which causes riotous commotion and excessively unreasonable noise, and so constitutes a public nuisance."

Did Mr. Gates display "tumultuous and highly agitated behavior" and cause "riotous commotion and excessively unreasonable noise"? In Sgt Crowley's judgment he did but the final verdict would have to be made by a Massachusetts judge.

John of NJ 7:35AM August 04, 2009

Dear Fred,

First of all, the correct word is you're - not your. Secondly, I don't understand how you can call Bonnie a racist. Even two prominent black colleagues of Crowley said that Gates rushed to judgment in his accusation.

I guess in your eyes (not "you're") if you're (not "your") white, you're (not "your") guilty until proven innocent.

Lee Ann of CT 9:22AM August 02, 2009