Thursday, April 30, 2015
The Baltimore minefield for 2016 hopefuls
The riots in the Baltimore have gotten significant attention this week. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that some potential and declared candidates for the presidency have given a few words on the matter. Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz make the argument that while the circumstances of Freddie Gray's death must be investigated, the rioting must stop. Rand Paul argues that the riots stem from cultural issues. Martin O'Malley has been under sharp criticism.
How should the riots in Baltimore be dealt with? Should police tactics and training be reformed?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with Hillary Clinton that body cameras on all police officers could help stop police brutality/injustice. I would think it's obvious that one should never just set a place on fire no matter what, but apparently not everyone has that mindset. When something as awful as this situation happens, of course people are going to lash out. It's a matter of humanity, honestly, and people need to learn that acts of violence won't cure anything. It's hard to blame rioting on unstable family matters or Mr. O'Malley; the root of the problem is something much more complicated.
ReplyDeleteThe body cameras would be a good idea but there is obviously going to be backlash on the idea because that's what happens these days. I agree that fixing the problem should be somewhat put on the parents by not allowing their children to "be exposed to the dangers of uncontrolled agitators on the streets." Like Rachel said, it's on humanity to realize these violent tactics won't cure anything.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I agree that body cameras are a great idea, it'll be hard to make it happen. Rioting, of course, isn't the best option. It's hard to really really conclude what the best option is on how to deal with the riots. It's a touchy subject.
ReplyDeleteI haven't been following the riots as closely as I would've liked to, so I feel insufficiently informed to answer this question, but in response to the body cameras, I agree that it would help, it would increase accountability and honesty regarding police brutality, and it would provide a first-hand view of any confrontations/interactions. However, it's a little too regulated for my preference and it greatly greatly decreases the overall value of privacy for Americans in general but especially for police officers. As for how to resolve the riots, I'm going with my default "talk it out." Obviously people are unhappy and they feel mistreated to the point that they feel they can only be heard through violence. Unfortunately, violence doesn't actually solve the problems at hand, it only draws attention to them. The next step would be the organization of some kind of meeting or forum where local government officials could talk to leaders in the police force and members of the community to work towards resolving the deeper issues in Baltimore (and, essentially, all over the nation).
ReplyDeleteWhen the white officer in south Carolina murdered the unarmed, fleeing black man, he was sent to prison because he was aught on camera murdering that man. If we had body cameras on all of our police officers, then police brutality would be ended, because they would know that they would be caught if they did something wrong just like that man was caught after he shot the guy in the back on video.
ReplyDeleteObviously police training and tactics are in definite need of reform. Body cameras would be a step forward to insuring that law enforcement officers are held accountable for their actions.
ReplyDeleteThe rioting in Baltimore was a terrible reaction to a pattern we have seen over the past few years of unarmed black men being killed by police officers. Understandably there has been anger over this. However, rioting is not the way to bring attention to this issue and it isn't a proper way to respond. Violence should not be used to bring about change, only peaceful demonstrations should be used. Now, I do believe that requiring all police officers to wear body cameras will go a long way to preventing further instances of police brutality. As the incident in South Carolina showed, if a police officer is caught on camera clearly killing an unarmed black man and trying to cover it up, then that police officer will be held accountable for what he has done. Body cameras would force police officers to use their weapons only when it is necessary. In combination with a reform of police training and tactics this would cut down on police brutality greatly and diffuse racial tensions that these recent incidents have brought up.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I am profoundly disappointed that our presidential candidates are "treading carefully when it comes to talking about the unrest." They are running to be the most powerful people in the world, and they can't buckle down and talk about some hard issues? I'm so tired of politicians dancing around the tough stuff. Message to the candidates...you will have to deal with the issues if elected. If you truly cared for the nation you would tell us your views instead of sucking up to the voting populace so we know who to vote for. Also, Ted Cruz said "but rioting and mayhem are not the answer." Then what is the answer?!? I know violence isn't, but if you are running to lead the country, you should at least express your thoughts on a path forward. When race relations/tensions are at an all time high, I just don't think a 292 word statement dancing around the issue cuts it. Do you?
ReplyDeleteIn terms of Hilary Clinton's views on body cameras, my perspective has changed over time. I believe they would be a healthy addition to the police force, both protecting the officers and protecting those the officers have sworn to protect.