Why are the media and our politicians fomenting the conditions creating the civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri?
Now, I’m by no means an expert on crowd control or the dynamics of riots, nor do I have a completely informed understanding of the unemployment conditions within the demographics of Ferguson or Brixton where a similar crisis arose in the UK in 2011. I want to make generalisations about these topics in regards to the consequences of what is actually very important here.
If we do not fully inform society with the information that explains who, what, when, where and importantly why a situation has transpired, it exacerbates these problems. Most importantly we need to inform people in a way that does not confuse the message, and this is where the both the press and elected officials could serve us far better if they weren’t so focused on self serving agendas and grandstanding. Rather than pushing buttons for no other reason than to produce great sound bites and headlines wouldn’t it be great if they had the moral fortitude to speak the truth.
“White police officer not prosecuted for killing unarmed black man”
This is typical of the message that we have heard out of Ferguson over the last few days and we have seen emotive interviews both the officer Darren Wilson, and the parents of Michael Brown.
Don’t shoot the messenger
I don’t want anyone for an instant to think I am cold and heartless, that this incident is just a blip that is irrelevant and move on people…. the loss of any life is a tragedy regardless of the circumstances, the parents of Michael Brown must be under immense stress from the public scrutiny they are subjected to, and Officer Wilson will suffer personally from the traumatic event he was a part of.
The observation that I have of the situation in Missouri is that there is a deliberate “Race” card being played and I for one don’t see any positive outcomes against racial discrimination as a consequence of that and more importantly I don’t believe that it is the real reason for the tragedy that has taken place.
If you sit down and look at the actual evidence presented to the Grand Jury, two things are clear; eyewitness testimony is clearly contradictory whether deliberate or from human fallibility (do some of the mind tests online to observe this for yourself) and even the most well intentioned person could believe something is true that just did not happen. The second aspect is that forensic analysis of physical evidence is objective and the evidence presented to the Grand Jury was incontrovertible.
So what is the actual message that should have been presented
“Police officer assaulted by violent suspect fatally shoots him while attempting to make arrest .”
There was no race consideration involved in this incident, I feel sorry for the parents who have lost a son who they say would never hurt anyone. The facts are though that Michael Brown assaulted a store owner during a robbery, he was shot the first time by a policeman who while trapped in his drivers seat being assaulted was able to draw his weapon and shoot his assailant. Michael Browns blood was on the trouser legs of Officer Wilson and the inside of the police vehicle.
There was a bullet lodged in the armrest of the car and all three autopsies agree on the first and last bullets entering Michael Brown’s body. The first could only have occurred as he was leaning inside the vehicle assaulting Officer Wilson and was on his hand. The last was a fatal injury outside on the street.
As a community we charge our police services to arrest and remove dangerous people, Officer Wilson was obligated not to walk away from the danger he was in but to do his job and pursue apprehend and arrest the man he suspected of conducting a robbery and who had just assaulted him.
Brown ran away a distance of about 150 yards which is where his blood was found, he turned around and was found fatally shot around 25 yards closer to the police vehicle. The eyewitness testimony differs remarkably at this point; it is obvious from the physical evidence that Brown was approaching Officer Wilson when he shot him. The only conclusion from this that we should accept as a society is that a violent suspect did not get on the ground when challenged by an armed officer. He continued to approach the officer and as a consequence he was shot.
If not race… what is the real message
President Obama was correct in his observation that there is a deep mistrust in these communities between police and black people. I believe that he did a disservice to these communities when he played the race card and said that it is because of past racial discrimination.
Yes, there is a well-documented history of the Ku Klux Klan, slavery and a long-standing general superiority complex of the white man. I certainly don’t dispute that; I just don’t think it serves any useful purpose to dwell of the sins of the father and certainly not at a political tool to connect to a select demographic in your electorate.
Stability in society is created when citizens have a prosperous society where they stand to lose more than they hope to gain from civil unrest. Both in Ferguson and in Brixton three years ago, it was not just black people rioting, when there are high levels of unemployment through economic difficulties, people are prone to rioting if there is a spark not handled well.
Some of the history of Brixton and the riots there show that race was not the predominant factor in who did and did not riot in many areas, it was largely the disaffected regardless of race that was the issue.
Becoming informed is our own responsibility but it is very dangerous when the media and officials provide irrelevant information that distracts us…
Yours in Successful Small Businesses…