Equivalency Argument

Whenever a cop (or a group of cops) kills an armed, unarmed, or non-compliant black man, the fair minded members of the inteligencia community eventually gets around to blaming the victim. They question his previous arrests, or his drug habits, or maybe even his school records. The media finds faded, out of focus, often grainy pictures of the victim grimacing, wearing a hoodie or football shoulder pads. His parents counter the smear campaign with photos of their little darling at his birthday party, or dressed up in a tux, gently pinning a corsage on his girlfriend’s wrist, and at last the heart wrenching graduation picture, with the sun shinning at his back.

Its all theater, but the acting has only begun. If the dirt surrounding the cops begins to pile up too thick, the tribe will bond together. Known liberal supporters of downtrodden urban unfortunates eventually join the lynch mob. Their typically saccharin flavored smiles turn upside down, and their sense of outrage turns against the dead victim. The focus turns away from the guilt or innocence of the victim or the police(men) that killed him and suddenly the equivalency argument comes into play. The subject unexpectedly changes and becomes a whining and unified chorus of ponderance, at last seeking to resolve the weighty and reoccurring question of black on black crime.

Once the evidence is cold, emotions have aged, and justice is forced to finally turn against itself and find an officer guilty, society will surely question why there is no equivalency of outrage when blacks kill blacks, or even worse – when blacks kill whites. “Whites, they always say, do not take to the streets and march, like disturbed black protesters do.” Dare I invoke the antics of the KKK, who has been known to occasionally hide behind their masks and the first amendment, while they partake in a parade of government sanctioned and permitted unrest.

When they can’t mouth an acceptable response to the slogan “Black Lives Matter”, the righteous turn the idea on its head, and pretend that the very concept somehow fails to regard the salient idea that white lives and of course – all lives matter.

Now the subject has been changed, and society can take the high ground that temporarily overlooks the murder of a black man. “Come to think of it, they will say, why is there is no outcry when gang members of the black’s own tribe kills far more blacks than cops ever do?” As expected, all of the sudden justice itself has to be placed on hold while society questions the propriety of anger against cops when there is seemingly no equivalent anger against other blacks that kill blacks or when these blacks outrageously kill whites. It is an effective dodge, but not an effective shield.

I would certainly understand the outrage, if a crowd of whites decided to demonstrate the loss of one of their tribe. Its not a mystery why they prefer to suffer their outrage in relative silence when faced with a black on white crime. I suspect that they have a belief that there will be a proper handing out of justice in court. There is no reason to demonstrate or protest when there will be a full and public accounting of the process.

If there be video of the crime, it will be on display immediately. Names and booking photos of any suspects will be released daily. A grand jury, if necessary will indite a perp with a quickness and a jury will likely find the suspects guilty as hell. Nothing to protest if the outcome is historically predestined.

The big issue that I am silently attempting to protestis that there is always an attempt to link the criminal actions of CRIMINALS, whose fate will never be disputed by me, with the actions of trained, sworn, and trusted police officers with a duty to protect the men that they kill..

http://www.1man1vote.com