Quote:
Originally Posted by piece-itpete
This thing is ugly all around, and my heart goes out to the poor kids parents and family. But it's become a much bogger thing, an indictment on much bogger issues. Look at what ccw guys are being called and accused of.
Pete
Pete
|
Well Pete, this really is a booger of an issue.
IMHO, the rhetoric here has become more polarized than necessary. FWIW, here's what I think.
The circumstances here do present an opportunity for discussion of concealed carry, and legitimate restrictions on gun ownership. That's a difficult discussion to have without charged rhetoric, but the issue is relevant.
When the evidence comes out in dribs and drabs, it is difficult to make a coherent analysis of the circumstances. I've seen enough evidence to think that a judicial officer or grand jury should hear all of the evidence to make a determination. When there has been a homicide - and this clearly comes within the definition of a homicide - a determination whether a crime has been committed should not rest within the sole discretion of the police or prosecuting attorney. That the shooter is connected is reason for particular scrutiny of the decision-making process.
The circumstances are sufficient to raise a real question whether race was a factor here. That a black kid in a gated community is deemed suspicious at least raises an inference of racial profiling. It is a legitimate question, but I agree with many here that we need more evidence to see if an answer to the question is even possible.
Our society is still far from free of racial bias. Undoubtedly racism has greatly diminished over the past few decades, but it is naive to suggest that is is gone. Even among those who would not be perceived as racist, subtle biases can exist. One need not conclude that the shooter is racist to believe that the data set that motivated him included some pre-conceived notions. The jury is still out, so to speak.
Regards,
D-Ray