“At first they (the protests) seemed like they had some
meaning. But now they just seem destructive and pointless. Is the idea just to
piss everyone off? Because that’s what’s happening.”
War veteran, who was dismayed as he watched the demonstrations in Ferguson grow
violent, with lootings and vandalism.
Black Lives Matter movement that emerged from the initial unrest in Ferguson
one year ago after Michael Brown, a black teen, was fatally shot while
unarmed by a white police officer.
One year later, after about 130 people were arrested in
the mayhem on Sunday and Monday, the movement appears to be at a crossroads. Do
they want to force political and social change, or do they want to make a bunch
of noise?
has outlined the Black Lives Matter agenda rather succinctly: end mandatory
minimum sentences, reform drug laws, put body cameras on all police, require independent investigations
of shootings by police.
All of those proposals are gaining steam with the support
of a wide array of politicians, from Barack Obama to Rand Paul.
So why is the Black Lives Matter movement engaging in a
way that is misguided at best, self-destructive at worst? Their voice is being
heard in the political arena, but the movement, in its shrill moments, seems
off target far too often. Property destruction and violent chants by protesters
do not help their cause.
grow discouraged by their tactics, especially the targeting of the ultraliberal Democratic
presidential candidate Bernie Sanders. They made the Vermont senator look like
a feeble old man at a campaign rally the other day when he was nearly shoved
aside and removed from the stage after surrendering the microphone to two
female Black Lives Matter activists.
One national leader of Black Lives Matter said on Tuesday
that each of the 22 presidential candidates will be confronted by the group.
But why Sanders first? He would certainly do more to reduce poverty and create
jobs in the inner cities than any other candidate, yet he is the first choice
for disruption and degradation.
police into an absolute, declaring that no deaths over the past year at the
hands of law enforcement across the nation were justified.
As for the Justice Department report on Brown’s death, it
found insufficient evidence to charge Officer Darren Wilson with wrongdoing, essentially
supported Wilson’s account, and echoed most grand jury testimony that Brown
attacked Wilson inside his police vehicle before Wilson killed him. The
protesters refuse to believe.
the facts out on the Brown shooting, poured through the stacks of documents
that provide verbatim testimony in the case but he didn’t quite find what he was looking for.
This is what he wrote in the New York Times:
“I sought to find an answer somewhere in the thousands of
pages of transcripts and evidence eventually released by the St. Louis County
prosecutor. Diving in, I was struck by the divergent accounts of the encounter
between Mr. Brown and Officer Wilson. The testimony led me to an unexpected
conclusion: The story of what happened in Ferguson, as told through these
documents, was certainly tragic, but was also much more complicated than I’d
previously understood.”
have, killing an unarmed suspect – in this case, an intimidating young man who
stole some cigars and tussled with a police officer – is never acceptable. And firing several shots – or 10 or 12 – at an
unarmed man is inexplicable.
But when an armed assailant shoots at a cop, he should not
be the subject of sympathy – or some fantasy rationalization — by Black Lives
Matter, or anyone else.
anniversary protests in Ferguson certainly appears to be justified. An 18-year-old,
Tyrone Harris Jr., allegedly fired twice at undercover detectives as they pursued him in
an unmarked van. When police shot back, Harris was struck badly enough to be
hospitalized in critical condition.
Yet Black Lives Matter activists remain suspicious.
activist group could soon lose its credibility and impact if it does not stick to the facts.
Here’s what Glawe observed about the group’s refusal to
accept the outcome of the Brown case:
Dept.) investigation they wanted, just not the conclusion they sought.
(McKesson insisted the report only cleared Wilson of violating Brown’s civil
rights.) For the movement, Wilson will never be justified in killing Brown.
“Brown’s death marked the beginning of a pattern for
activists. When a black person dies at the hands of a police officer — especially
a white one — activists begin investigating the events of the fatal
confrontation. Inevitably there are conflicting statements, the most glaring of
which came in the case of Walter Scott (in North Carolina), whose killer lied
about having his taser grabbed and, in fact, (the officer) planted one near the
dying man’s body. Thankfully, that horrendous act was caught on tape.k Lives
Matter got the independent investigation they wanted, just not theonclusion
they sought.
“But unless there is irrefutable evidence to indict an
officer, activists remain forever suspicious. That’s why, when hundreds
gathered over the weekend to honor VonDeritt Myers Jr., shot and killed last
year by a St. Louis cop, there was no mention that Myers was found to have
fired at police with a stolen gun and then fled before being shot. That is
according to a 272-page report made public by the St. Louis Police Department
that was separate from another investigation carried out by prosecutors. That
investigation also found Myers shot at the off-duty cop, who was justified in
returning fire.”
uses lawlessness to defend lawlessness, then they have lost.
