Police Pamphlets and a Common State of Emergency (op-ed)
In 1775 Thomas Pain wrote a revolutionary pamphlet called Common Sense.
In 2015 it appears sense is not common (Neither is courtesy, a bigger problem.) and the president of a local Black political organization and an official of the state ACLU released an updated version of their 1995 pamphlet “You & The Police”. This pamphlet explained the proper way to act when encountered by the police. At the press announcement there was no representative of the police. (An official example of no common courtesy.) Maybe the police were preparing a pamphlet of their own: BLACK & BLUE (How to prevent “you” from becoming.) Rule one: Shut up! If you’re driving without a license or if your license is suspended confess now or this could get ugly.
Anything is worth a try to improve community/police relations. The only obstacle is that computer literacy has replaced the concept that reading is fundamental.
I was a college student when the original pamphlet was created. It was after the police choked to death Jonny Gammage, and it was clear to everyone outside of a jury box that Gammage’s death was not an accident. Even the coroner stated homicide charges should be brought against the officers. The Rallies for justice for Jonny Gammage were the first I joined.
But my political consciousness bloomed before hand as a teenager because of Rodney King. It wasn’t the police beating or the not guilty verdict that affected me it was the curfew enforced in the borough I lived because of rioting on the other side of the country. And in that brief time it seemed to me the borough changed from citizens with police protection to colonial subjects quartering soldiers. (I thought that was prohibited by the third amendment?)
I asked my father why we were being punished. I expected him to say something deep that ended with “you’ll understand when you’re older”, but he didn’t, for the first time he didn’t have an answer. That scared me. I had to figure out the answers alone. My mind entered a state of emergency which is common for a young person attempting to make sense out of uncommon events in the adult world. All I knew was the verdict was wrong, the reaction wasn’t right, and the local response seemed to me an act of lunacy. And there was no pamphlet to explain why it was allowed. Just like no pamphlet or parent could explain the acquittal of involuntary manslaughter charges for one of the officers involved in the death of Jonny Gammage.
The summer following the Gammage death there was a police shooting that divided the city, black/white, anti-police/pro-police. But this incident involved a stolen car, a police officer’s hand stuck between the driver’s door, and the officer dragged along side of a vehicle going 70mph. The officer fired into to the vehicle to stop it from moving and to prevent his own death. Two young Black men in the back seat were killed.
It was clear this was not a case of excessive force. But the outrage against the police reached its peak. There was a rally of harmony hoping to ease racial tensions.
During these events I was still a college student, but I was also a counselor in a summer program working with teenagers. One thirteen year old, who wanted to be a police officer when he grew up, came to me in his own mental state of emergency. He asked, “Why is everyone mad at the police if the cop was dragged in a stolen car?” And like my father I didn’t have an answer. So I asked him what his parents said. He said, “My mother told me the police are racist.” Then he made a statement that was unpopular and made at that time uncommon sense. He said, “But this isn’t Jonny Gammage. So why is everybody mad?”
His state of emergency was a little different than mine, but neither of us had a pamphlet or a parent that could help us filter through the fog of fraudulence that hid harsh realities no one wanted to face.
First published in The New Pittsburgh Courier 4/1/15
In 2015 it appears sense is not common (Neither is courtesy, a bigger problem.) and the president of a local Black political organization and an official of the state ACLU released an updated version of their 1995 pamphlet “You & The Police”. This pamphlet explained the proper way to act when encountered by the police. At the press announcement there was no representative of the police. (An official example of no common courtesy.) Maybe the police were preparing a pamphlet of their own: BLACK & BLUE (How to prevent “you” from becoming.) Rule one: Shut up! If you’re driving without a license or if your license is suspended confess now or this could get ugly.
Anything is worth a try to improve community/police relations. The only obstacle is that computer literacy has replaced the concept that reading is fundamental.
I was a college student when the original pamphlet was created. It was after the police choked to death Jonny Gammage, and it was clear to everyone outside of a jury box that Gammage’s death was not an accident. Even the coroner stated homicide charges should be brought against the officers. The Rallies for justice for Jonny Gammage were the first I joined.
But my political consciousness bloomed before hand as a teenager because of Rodney King. It wasn’t the police beating or the not guilty verdict that affected me it was the curfew enforced in the borough I lived because of rioting on the other side of the country. And in that brief time it seemed to me the borough changed from citizens with police protection to colonial subjects quartering soldiers. (I thought that was prohibited by the third amendment?)
I asked my father why we were being punished. I expected him to say something deep that ended with “you’ll understand when you’re older”, but he didn’t, for the first time he didn’t have an answer. That scared me. I had to figure out the answers alone. My mind entered a state of emergency which is common for a young person attempting to make sense out of uncommon events in the adult world. All I knew was the verdict was wrong, the reaction wasn’t right, and the local response seemed to me an act of lunacy. And there was no pamphlet to explain why it was allowed. Just like no pamphlet or parent could explain the acquittal of involuntary manslaughter charges for one of the officers involved in the death of Jonny Gammage.
The summer following the Gammage death there was a police shooting that divided the city, black/white, anti-police/pro-police. But this incident involved a stolen car, a police officer’s hand stuck between the driver’s door, and the officer dragged along side of a vehicle going 70mph. The officer fired into to the vehicle to stop it from moving and to prevent his own death. Two young Black men in the back seat were killed.
It was clear this was not a case of excessive force. But the outrage against the police reached its peak. There was a rally of harmony hoping to ease racial tensions.
During these events I was still a college student, but I was also a counselor in a summer program working with teenagers. One thirteen year old, who wanted to be a police officer when he grew up, came to me in his own mental state of emergency. He asked, “Why is everyone mad at the police if the cop was dragged in a stolen car?” And like my father I didn’t have an answer. So I asked him what his parents said. He said, “My mother told me the police are racist.” Then he made a statement that was unpopular and made at that time uncommon sense. He said, “But this isn’t Jonny Gammage. So why is everybody mad?”
His state of emergency was a little different than mine, but neither of us had a pamphlet or a parent that could help us filter through the fog of fraudulence that hid harsh realities no one wanted to face.
First published in The New Pittsburgh Courier 4/1/15
Comments
Post a Comment