aw shouldn't be a problem, right?? WRONG!!! Just as with the legal system and law enforcement in general, I have no problem with the concept itself, it's the day-to-day operation of the enforcement that lends itself to corruption and flaws. So - switching back into my Conspiracy Brother mode - now the law has given cops a free pass to harass anyone they deem as "suspicious," namely minorities. It's not a surprise that the police are regular people, many of whom are caught up on the power the police shield bears. Many Americans, especially those in border states, have a problem with the fact that so many Latinos are illegally crossing the border and stealing so many labor jobs from US citizens. So it's undeniable that there is some element of this prejudice that is backed by the power of the police shield. So enforcement can start as simple and straightforward as stopping anybody they feel like on the streets and checking their legality. Later, they could be using this as an excuse to shut down parties and any gathering of populations they don't favor; similar to the unwritten Jim Crow practices that police weren't to allow gathering of more than three Black people at a time in public places. In time, they will be able to use the law as a loophole to get around warrants for searches and seizures. Imagine turning on the news and some raid has taken place and the cops justify going in without a warrant by saying "we saw people walking inside that we suspected may be illegal immigrants, so we broke the door down and happened to find some suspicious things." And if those who do have green cards can land in police custody if they don't have them on their person then the police have an easy scare tactic/threat to back up any prejudice an officer may bear. Law enforcement officers already tamper evidence and find loopholes to support widespread corruption and racial profiling; I predict this law will do nothing but make it worse if a firm hand does not keep street level enforcers in check about how they're allowed to go about enforcement of this law. I don't have confidence that someone will keep them in line adequately. I'll end by saying, I'm glad I'm not a Latino living in Arizona right about now; and that coming from a young Black male living in the South. My Inner Conspiracy Brother has spoken...P.S. I know that picture had nothing to do with the topic but it was too funny to pass up. Distasteful, I know, But I've Been Called Worse...
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
My Inner Conspiracy Brother: New Arizona Immigration Law
As a young Black male who's has either experienced first hand or heard closely about many of the possible ills with our law enforcement and legal systems, I'm never going to think the way that our traditional lawmakers do about their legislation. Another example of that has arisen lately. In Arizona, a law has been passed giving law enforcement the authority to stop and demand the proper identification from anyone they deem as suspicious. The concept is to safeguard against illegal immigration, which has identified as a major problem in that area. At this point, everything sound legit, after all, there are some 25 million illegal aliens or more in the US many of which cross the border in Arizona or nearby. This simply reinforces existing immigration regulations that most people, myself included, have no real problems with. So this new l
aw shouldn't be a problem, right?? WRONG!!! Just as with the legal system and law enforcement in general, I have no problem with the concept itself, it's the day-to-day operation of the enforcement that lends itself to corruption and flaws. So - switching back into my Conspiracy Brother mode - now the law has given cops a free pass to harass anyone they deem as "suspicious," namely minorities. It's not a surprise that the police are regular people, many of whom are caught up on the power the police shield bears. Many Americans, especially those in border states, have a problem with the fact that so many Latinos are illegally crossing the border and stealing so many labor jobs from US citizens. So it's undeniable that there is some element of this prejudice that is backed by the power of the police shield. So enforcement can start as simple and straightforward as stopping anybody they feel like on the streets and checking their legality. Later, they could be using this as an excuse to shut down parties and any gathering of populations they don't favor; similar to the unwritten Jim Crow practices that police weren't to allow gathering of more than three Black people at a time in public places. In time, they will be able to use the law as a loophole to get around warrants for searches and seizures. Imagine turning on the news and some raid has taken place and the cops justify going in without a warrant by saying "we saw people walking inside that we suspected may be illegal immigrants, so we broke the door down and happened to find some suspicious things." And if those who do have green cards can land in police custody if they don't have them on their person then the police have an easy scare tactic/threat to back up any prejudice an officer may bear. Law enforcement officers already tamper evidence and find loopholes to support widespread corruption and racial profiling; I predict this law will do nothing but make it worse if a firm hand does not keep street level enforcers in check about how they're allowed to go about enforcement of this law. I don't have confidence that someone will keep them in line adequately. I'll end by saying, I'm glad I'm not a Latino living in Arizona right about now; and that coming from a young Black male living in the South. My Inner Conspiracy Brother has spoken...P.S. I know that picture had nothing to do with the topic but it was too funny to pass up. Distasteful, I know, But I've Been Called Worse...
aw shouldn't be a problem, right?? WRONG!!! Just as with the legal system and law enforcement in general, I have no problem with the concept itself, it's the day-to-day operation of the enforcement that lends itself to corruption and flaws. So - switching back into my Conspiracy Brother mode - now the law has given cops a free pass to harass anyone they deem as "suspicious," namely minorities. It's not a surprise that the police are regular people, many of whom are caught up on the power the police shield bears. Many Americans, especially those in border states, have a problem with the fact that so many Latinos are illegally crossing the border and stealing so many labor jobs from US citizens. So it's undeniable that there is some element of this prejudice that is backed by the power of the police shield. So enforcement can start as simple and straightforward as stopping anybody they feel like on the streets and checking their legality. Later, they could be using this as an excuse to shut down parties and any gathering of populations they don't favor; similar to the unwritten Jim Crow practices that police weren't to allow gathering of more than three Black people at a time in public places. In time, they will be able to use the law as a loophole to get around warrants for searches and seizures. Imagine turning on the news and some raid has taken place and the cops justify going in without a warrant by saying "we saw people walking inside that we suspected may be illegal immigrants, so we broke the door down and happened to find some suspicious things." And if those who do have green cards can land in police custody if they don't have them on their person then the police have an easy scare tactic/threat to back up any prejudice an officer may bear. Law enforcement officers already tamper evidence and find loopholes to support widespread corruption and racial profiling; I predict this law will do nothing but make it worse if a firm hand does not keep street level enforcers in check about how they're allowed to go about enforcement of this law. I don't have confidence that someone will keep them in line adequately. I'll end by saying, I'm glad I'm not a Latino living in Arizona right about now; and that coming from a young Black male living in the South. My Inner Conspiracy Brother has spoken...P.S. I know that picture had nothing to do with the topic but it was too funny to pass up. Distasteful, I know, But I've Been Called Worse...
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Food for Thought: Kevorkian and the Right to Suicide
I recently watched HBO's Original Movie entitled "You Don't Know Jack" chronicling the actions, beliefs, and legal tribulations of the controversial figure pathologist and "right-to-die" activist Dr. Jack Kevorkian. It wa
s a name I heard as a young child as the butt of many jokes, but I didn't know and furthermore wouldn't have completely understood the actions of the man. So when I saw the commercials for the original movie and the casting of Al Pacino - one of my favorite actors - I was intrigued. So I watched it and as usual with me, it got me thinking deeply. And I never thought I'd say this when I was a child and I heard his name smeared as if he were a serial murderer, but I agree with Dr. Jack. People tend to draw their own conclusions when they hear the numbers; he "assisted" over 130 suicides. But this man wasn't some deranged mad scientist hell-bent on seeing people die or the power to kill in legal means. He lost his medical license because of his actions, I think the risk itself of losing the right to practice medicine would've scared him out of that if this were only some sick hobby. He offered his services to terminally ill patients who contacted him, not vice versa. Furthermore, the numerous times he was brought to trial, he wasn't trying to find some slimy rhetorical or loopholes to avoid going to jail. He was deliberately trying to use the legal system to put what in his mind was an archaic and overall nonsensical double standard on trial. He was more than willing to become the martyr of the issue if it could eventually overturn prejudice against, or at least further the argument for, "right to die" decisions for terminally ill or constantly suffering patients. In the picture below Kevorkian is shown coming to court wearing a medieval wooden pillory to represent his distaste that the prosecution had to resort to such outdated and outrageous common law doctrine to prosecute him. According to the ancient common law doctrines used conversion away from Christianity and openly disagreeing with anything in the Bible were also criminal acts. He carried out his services to a dear friend of his who was diagnosed with terminal cancer, so he clearly wasn't a hypocrite either. So many people are great and standing up for an issue until the question "What if it was someone you knew" question is asked. So speaking as I speak to my people, I feel him. The biggest argument against him was "You don't have the right to play God, you're overstepping your bounds trying to determine who lives or dies." However, quite frankly that's in the job description of the doctor under the Hippocratic Oath. I mean, if a doctor said "This guy's dying and I can help him, but who am I to interfere with the will of God?" he'd be crucified for violating the Oath and "playing God" in that situation. Sounds like a double standard. If a person is unconscious in a coma, the d
ecision can be made to pull the plug from the machine and let them die with no problem, but if a conscious, rational Lou Gehrig's disease sufferer says they've been living in excruciating pain for years and wants to escape the pain and stop causing their family so much stress and money, the doctor can't listen to him? Is "physician insisted suicide" a medical service to a dying or suffering patient, or is is "murder"? More applicably to me and my demographic, three NYPD officers can shoot an unarmed man outside his home 41 times (over 2.5 full clips between the 3 pigs...i mean cops) and no one even loses their jobs, but Kevorkian had to do over eight years for "murder" for lethally injecting a man who looked up and contacted Kevorkian to help him die; he even went so far as to sign an informed consent form. I ran track with someone who intentionally shot a man to death and was out in less than five years. Does that seem fair? What's next, abortionists facing prosecution despite the women coming to the clinics for their services? And one ideal from everything I heard Kevorkian say resonated the most with me; if I were in a situation where I'd have to live the remainder of my life in excruciating pain until my terminal disease finally killed me, I may want the option to die peacefully too. I wouldn't want to be such a burden on my family, I wouldn't want to be reduced to the point where I have no quality of life and am simply a charity case, and I wouldn't want to spend years and years suffering when I know that there's no light at the end of the tunnel. I also may want the right to die on my terms. Food for Thought...
s a name I heard as a young child as the butt of many jokes, but I didn't know and furthermore wouldn't have completely understood the actions of the man. So when I saw the commercials for the original movie and the casting of Al Pacino - one of my favorite actors - I was intrigued. So I watched it and as usual with me, it got me thinking deeply. And I never thought I'd say this when I was a child and I heard his name smeared as if he were a serial murderer, but I agree with Dr. Jack. People tend to draw their own conclusions when they hear the numbers; he "assisted" over 130 suicides. But this man wasn't some deranged mad scientist hell-bent on seeing people die or the power to kill in legal means. He lost his medical license because of his actions, I think the risk itself of losing the right to practice medicine would've scared him out of that if this were only some sick hobby. He offered his services to terminally ill patients who contacted him, not vice versa. Furthermore, the numerous times he was brought to trial, he wasn't trying to find some slimy rhetorical or loopholes to avoid going to jail. He was deliberately trying to use the legal system to put what in his mind was an archaic and overall nonsensical double standard on trial. He was more than willing to become the martyr of the issue if it could eventually overturn prejudice against, or at least further the argument for, "right to die" decisions for terminally ill or constantly suffering patients. In the picture below Kevorkian is shown coming to court wearing a medieval wooden pillory to represent his distaste that the prosecution had to resort to such outdated and outrageous common law doctrine to prosecute him. According to the ancient common law doctrines used conversion away from Christianity and openly disagreeing with anything in the Bible were also criminal acts. He carried out his services to a dear friend of his who was diagnosed with terminal cancer, so he clearly wasn't a hypocrite either. So many people are great and standing up for an issue until the question "What if it was someone you knew" question is asked. So speaking as I speak to my people, I feel him. The biggest argument against him was "You don't have the right to play God, you're overstepping your bounds trying to determine who lives or dies." However, quite frankly that's in the job description of the doctor under the Hippocratic Oath. I mean, if a doctor said "This guy's dying and I can help him, but who am I to interfere with the will of God?" he'd be crucified for violating the Oath and "playing God" in that situation. Sounds like a double standard. If a person is unconscious in a coma, the d
ecision can be made to pull the plug from the machine and let them die with no problem, but if a conscious, rational Lou Gehrig's disease sufferer says they've been living in excruciating pain for years and wants to escape the pain and stop causing their family so much stress and money, the doctor can't listen to him? Is "physician insisted suicide" a medical service to a dying or suffering patient, or is is "murder"? More applicably to me and my demographic, three NYPD officers can shoot an unarmed man outside his home 41 times (over 2.5 full clips between the 3 pigs...i mean cops) and no one even loses their jobs, but Kevorkian had to do over eight years for "murder" for lethally injecting a man who looked up and contacted Kevorkian to help him die; he even went so far as to sign an informed consent form. I ran track with someone who intentionally shot a man to death and was out in less than five years. Does that seem fair? What's next, abortionists facing prosecution despite the women coming to the clinics for their services? And one ideal from everything I heard Kevorkian say resonated the most with me; if I were in a situation where I'd have to live the remainder of my life in excruciating pain until my terminal disease finally killed me, I may want the option to die peacefully too. I wouldn't want to be such a burden on my family, I wouldn't want to be reduced to the point where I have no quality of life and am simply a charity case, and I wouldn't want to spend years and years suffering when I know that there's no light at the end of the tunnel. I also may want the right to die on my terms. Food for Thought...
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Graduation, My Mother's Day Gift
May 8th, 2010...A day that will live in infamy. I graduated from Georgia Tech, one of the most rigorous schools in the world, with a Building Construction Degree from the College of Architecture. This means I (and my homeboys pictured below) beat the odds as a young black man in America (every major research source has validated the fact that recently more Black men had been to jail that college, our graduation rates are some 20% lower than white males and substantially lower than Black and White women also), beat the odds at Tech (53% retention rate for Black males), given myself a significantly higher chance at leading a financially successful life, made everyone who's ever done anything for me or had a hand in my upbringing proud, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, given my mother the Mother's Day gift that she asked me for. It was a gratifying feeling. I'm gonna take some time to reflect on my full feeling about the end of my college career, beginning of the "rest of my life" and the quickly approaching end of my collegiate sports career. There will be a blog upcoming about a college experience in the rear view mirror.
As the name "I've Been Called Worse" insinuates I've been called a lot of things, some which I am, many that I am not, but not u have no choice but to call me a Georgia Tech/College..... Graduate.
As the name "I've Been Called Worse" insinuates I've been called a lot of things, some which I am, many that I am not, but not u have no choice but to call me a Georgia Tech/College..... Graduate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
