E-mail Scott
Scott's Links
About the Author
Opinion Archives
Social Media:
Facebook
Twitter
Tumblr
Google Plus
YouTube
Flickr
PhotoBucket
Monthly Archives:

January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
August 2012
September 2012
October 2012
November 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
August 2013
September 2013
October 2013
November 2013
December 2013
January 2014
February 2014
March 2014
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
September 2014
October 2014
November 2014
December 2014
January 2015
February 2015
March 2015
April 2015
May 2015
June 2015
July 2015
August 2015
September 2015
October 2015
November 2015
December 2015
January 2016
February 2016
March 2016
April 2016
May 2016
June 2016
July 2016
August 2016
September 2016
October 2016
November 2016
December 2016
January 2017
February 2017
March 2017
April 2017
May 2017

Powered by Blogger
Subscribe via RSS

Monday, December 15, 2014

Eric Garner is not Michael Brown

Posted by Scott Tibbs at 4:00 AM (#)

Eric Garner and Michael Brown are two large, unarmed black men killed by police officers. That is where the similarity between the two men and their cases ends, and it is dishonest and irresponsible to equate the two. It is an insult to Garner's memory and to Garner's family to equate his case with Brown's case.

First, the Brown case. We know that the story told by Brown's friend - that Brown was executed on the street for jaywalking - was an outright fantasy. We know there was a fight between Brown and Darren Wilson, and if Wilson's account is true he had maybe a second or two before a charging Brown was on top of him. I find Wilson's story credible but we will probably never know the full extent of what happened on that August day in Ferguson. It did not help that the Ferguson police department has bungled this case from day one.

With Garner, there are no such doubts. We know exactly what happened. Brown may have been violent, and may have attacked Wilson. Garner did not strike, assault or threaten anyone. He did not commit a strong arm robbery. Garner was accosted for selling single cigarettes without collecting the taxes that city government demands. Much like the Mafia, New York City demands a piece of that action. This was turf protection, nothing more.

This could have been resolved without the use of force. Simply telling Mr. Garner to move along and perhaps citing him for the infraction of selling cigarettes without paying off city government would have been a proportionate response. It was not a proportionate response for several police officers to violently tackle him and put him in a submission hold. Had the police not needlessly escalated the confrontation, Garner would still be alive. Irritated, but alive.

It strains credibility to equate the death of a man who was completely nonviolent and was guilty of nothing more that failing to collect taxes for New York City with the death of a man who had a fight with a police officer. There is a reason that there is a deep divide over the result of the Brown case and wide agreement over the Garner case. The two cases are completely separate and should be treated that way. To do otherwise is an insult to Eric Garner and his family.


Below are the rules for commenting on ConservaTibbs.com.

  1. A reasonable level of civility is expected. While it is expected that controversial political and social issues may generate heated debate, there are common-sense limits of civility that will be enforced.

  2. This blog is a family-friendly site. Therefore no cursing, profanity, vulgarity, obscenity, etc. will be allowed. This is a zero-tolerance rule and will result in automatic deletion of the offending post.

  3. Anonymity has greatly coarsened discourse on the Internet, so pseudonyms are discouraged but not forbidden. That said, any direct criticism of a person by name cannot be done anonymously. If you criticize someone, you have to subject yourself to the same level of scrutiny or the comment will be deleted.

  4. Please keep your comments relevant to the topic of the post.

  5. All moderation decisions are final. I may post an explanation or I may not, depending on the situation. If you have a question or a concern about a moderation decision, e-mail me privately rather than posting in the comments.

Thank you for your cooperation.