Law(lessness) & Order
On a holiday weekend, you cannot pry me off of my couch. You could not pay me to look away. When that instinctive DING DING comes at the top of the hour, that is my cue that the next 59 minutes will belong to the astute detectives and lawyers of Law & Order. (Don't you judge me for re-watching that one episode 11 times - the outcome might be different this time!)
I am always amazed at how adeptly they find evidence, solve cases, and situate the show within the greater contextual space in society.
...
Two weeks ago, I could not be pried off the couch. I could not look away. I could not shake the migraine out of my head.
The shooting of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile made an impact on me in ways that I could not describe sensibly at the time. Perhaps it was because the blood used on Law & Order is made of corn starch and food coloring, and I know it. Yet the blood I saw coming from Alton and Philando had a unique bright color to it. It was inconsistent with the viscous dark substance that emanates from the characters on the show. It was real.
And, as much as I claim I have seen people shot before, I realize that, in those instances, I looked away (or rather dropped to the ground and rolled away from the window). I had never actually seen someone get shot and die. Until July 6...
I could belabor the point about my feelings, well-being, and emotional toil, but a much more important point exists.
The lawlessness with which the police officers involved in both publicized and far more unpublicized cases operate is incomprehensible and inappropriate.
Our legal system teaches us that we cannot take the law into our own hands - that the court of law will indicate whether our actions are justifiable or punishable.
I could again speak on the hypocrisy of the law to allow its citizens to carry guns but then feel threatened when a gun is on the citizen - whether known or simply suspected. I could argue that a man on his back or acknowledging he has a gun should reduce the "threat" one feels when apprehending a "suspect".
But in the case of Charles Kinsey - a caretaker of an autistic man - who was ON HIS BACK WITH HIS HANDS UP, we need only speak about lawlessness.
We need not waste time with evidence - people have proven that facts be damned with regard to their leanings (Trump supporters, anyone?). We need not waste time with my psychological or emotional derision.
We need to talk procedures.
The "call" to police officers was about a "suspicious man" with a gun. (Did you say toy truck? No. Gun.)
What's the procedure when you have a man on the ground trying to convince an autistic man to follow his lead? For that matter, given the confusion on the autistic man's face, what's the procedure for even being a Black man around police officers these days? It's one thing when you try to explain to a young Black autistic man how to deal with the police, but can you imagine what he might be thinking when those very basic procedural tasks don't work?
WHAT. IS. THE. PROCEDURE?
The cop went on to say that he didn't know why he shot Charles. This was after of course Charles was flipped over and handcuffed (while shot. while his charge was playing with a toy truck. in the middle of the street. with no weapons).
You don't know why you shot a man?
Can you actually tell me why you shouldn't have shot him?
Is he not innocent until proven guilty?
Or have we taken the law into our own hands, providing the same order of suspicious Black man, shoot, repeat in every subsequent shooting?
The only thing I like as a marathon is the TV show - I'm beyond tired of the same police brutality show playing out on the news. Maybe if I just keep watching, the outcome will change one day...