Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
Maybe they were both in the wrong. Gates, for assuming the police were there to harass him because he is black, and the cop, for taking the wrong opportunity to reinforce the laws about disorderly conduct.
Discretion is an important part of being a police officer. Whether or not he was TECHNICALLY correct in arresting Gates, I'll bet both he and his department wish he hadn't.
I'd also say Gates has no moral high ground on which to proclaim racism in his treatment; whether or not his own obvious racism is justified by past history, he still harbors racist attitudes. As soon as you justify racism due to YOUR experience, you implicitly approve racism due to others' experiences.
|
I can agree with that. I doubt that he was technically correct in arresting him, but I think it's pretty clear that it was regrettable either way.
As for moral high ground, I'd agree that Gates has none. But to me this issue isn't really about his moral character. The fact that he's a respected and well-known Harvard professor just adds to the public relations fiasco here, but it doesn't materially affect the facts of the case. To me there are two issues:
1. The burden of establishing probable cause for entering a residence without permission. (i.e. the race of the person inside should not be sufficient).
2. The question of whether a person can be summarily arrested and detained against their will just for being a jerk.
For the record, I don't doubt that Gates was being a jerk. For all I know he's a jerk all the time! But I don't think that's a crime. And I don't think his frustration was totally unwarranted; I'd be frustrated too.