Darius Simmons was 13 years old when the old man next door killed him. John Henry Spooner—white, 76, and angry—was sure the black kid had stolen his guns, and even surer when the kid denied it. When Spooner saw Darius taking out the garbage, he stepped outside and shot the boy dead. And while there’s a lot to hate about what happened, one cold and terrible message especially stands out for me: John Henry Spooner loved his missing guns more than he loved the child next door, and he didn’t mind writing that out in blood.
That’s what the American debate over Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws has increasingly become: a question of whether the lives of our young people matter more than our craven and sometimes baseless suspicions that our property will be taken away from us.
When an anonymous website commenter warned earlier this week on the Jackson Free Press website that potential burglars—or, as he called them, “little sh*ts”—would take everything we own if we weren’t willing to kill them on sight, I thought of what Michael Dunn wrote in prison as part of a letter to his father. Dunn, a 45-year-old white man, fired into a car full of black teenagers because he thought they were playing their music too loud; 17-year-old Jordan Davis was shot dead, and two of his friends were wounded.
“The jail is full of blacks,” he wrote to his father, “and they all act like thugs … [I]f more people would kill these [expletive] idiots … eventually they may take the hint and change their behavior.” Even after he had killed a teenager, Dunn saw his victim—not himself—as the “thug.”
Recent white vigilantism in the wake of the George Zimmerman verdict has given us a horrifyingly long list of examples like these. The most recent to get national attention was the death of Renisha McBride, 19, her beautiful face blown off by 54-year-old Theodore Wafer in suburban Detroit because she knocked on his door after surviving a late-night car accident.
The death of 20-year-old Quardious Thomas, mowed down in Jackson for allegedly breaking into an unoccupied car earlier this year, fits the pattern less neatly—the shooter was black, and Thomas wasn’t a completely innocent bystander—but local law enforcement’s casual response to the shooting sends the message that his life wasn’t worth very much.
And when you take into account one police officer’s suggestion that a local business owner “buy a gun” to prevent burglaries at his office, it’s clear that we’ve reached a point where we’re comfortable with the idea of young people—and, in nearly every case we’ve encountered, young black people—getting shot down because we think they might break something or steal something.
If we look back at the shooting that started this recent wave of vigilante killings, it’s clear that it was motivated by the same kind of thinking. George Zimmerman had chased down 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, a kid walking home at night, because “they always get away.”
Zimmerman, who had called police 46 times over the previous two years, decided to chase one of “them” down and personally make sure he wouldn’t escape. Zimmerman, it is clear, saw himself—and may still see himself—as a hero. The same is certainly true of Dunn, and may also be true of Spooner and Wafer. And it plays into a very well-established American mythology surrounding the glamorous vigilante crimefighter—dating all the way back to Wild West gunslingers, and all the way forward to today’s superhero flicks.
Even if we could completely rely on the accuracy of our suspicions, there’s nothing remotely heroic about trading the lives of our young people for material things. The violent fantasies that animate public policies surrounding Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws aren’t rooted in legitimate heroism; they come from our arrogance, greed, and pride. We each only get one life, and it’s a horrible fact of our lives that many of us have to do without things that are stolen from us.
But these families have lost their children. And these often innocent and sometimes guilty but confused young people whose very selves are snuffed out by vigilantes—they’re not “little sh*ts.” They’re our dead. And if we can’t muster up the courage to grieve for them, we should grieve for our own capacity for tenderness, and the spirit of vengeance, the bloody-minded callousness, that has replaced it.
Tom Head, Ph.D., is a Jackson native. He is author or coauthor of 25 books, including “The Absolute Beginner’s Guide to the Bible” (Que/Pearson, 2005, $26.99).
Previous Comments
Que Lastima! It’s too bad you didn’t develop some common sense around that Ph.D. and 25 books that you wrote because it is obvious that you have not been around the neighborhoods where Mr. Williams lives. I guess a sense of protecting what is yours and your family doesn’t come naturally to you. In the first instance you cite, the older man had obvious mental problems. Are you saying that anyone in the Q. Thomas case had mental problems? What is your proof? Your second instance is just more of the same and has nothing to do with any aspect of the Thomas case. You are pushing together the Florida Stand your Ground law and MS. Castle Doctrine. They are two different laws for two different states and have different provisions. I would like to know why Mr. Thomas did this (was he on drugs?). Did he also break into the sheriff’s car? The leg monitor record might give answers. I believe Ms. Ladd is correct that the D.A. should not investigate this death because he is a relative, and since a number of questions have arisen I believe the state Attorney-General’s office should investigate. BTW, I hold degrees in Economics and Philosophy and I am listed in Who’s Who in America, among other publications.
#5030 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Dec 19 2013
I see nothing heroic or glamorous regarding the incidents you cited involving Dunn, Spooner, or Wafer. I can understand Wafer’s need to answer the door holding a weapon, but not using it in this situation.
#5076 | Author: js1976 | Date: Dec 27 2013
Turtleread, your comment leaves me less than convinced that you’ve actually read the article. If you have a point to make, you need to focus a little less on my bio (and yours) and a little more on exactly what that point is.
#5091 | Author: Tom Head | Date: Dec 31 2013
Tomhead, Sir, you are the one calling me out in your article and while I generally do not argue with those who have an excess of ink and paper on hand and an ax to grind, I found your remarks less than honest and tinged with the romance of savior complex, instead of based in a fast-paced, reality world filled with complex ethical issues. I understand the point perfectly from Ms. Ladd. She believes that property crimes, even when they are happening on your property and perhaps involve a large amount of damage and expense cannot be responded to by deadly force. I can see her point of view, but it does not necessarily conform to common law nor the Castle Doctrine. The state’s citizens tried your way for many years, but lack of police, jails, and other methods left people with few alternatives. The myth that children or life is precious is a Western idea. I’ve been to the Far East, there, not so much. It is the content of their character that counts, Mr. Head, not the color of their skin. Mr. Thomas was already wearing a leg monitor. Obviously, a court had made a judgment on his character even while he was in the midst of committing another crime.
#5097 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Dec 31 2013
Turtleread, if you don’t like being quoted as saying shameful things in public, maybe you shouldn’t say shameful things in public. Beyond that, I don’t know what to suggest.
#5099 | Author: Tom Head | Date: Dec 31 2013
I am not ashamed to call a criminal (remember he was convicted and wearing a leg monitor) who was breaking the glass, and stealing items from others cars on their property while the owners were asleep, a little sh*t. He was also implicated in damaging the sheriff’s personal automobile as well. Perhaps you have nothing to say because you are a “spent force,” someone who, like gum that has been chewed too long, has lost its flavor. You have no new ideas, either politically or socially to fix problems. I understand, but do you have to run your mouth and take up space in the JFP if you won’t offer anything new in the way of a solution or solutions to the problem?
#5102 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 2 2014
Turtleread, a law enforcement policy of letting young black men get shot to death without an investigation is not a new idea. It’s a very old idea. I look forward to continuing to take up space in the JFP in the year ahead. Maybe one day, if you find the courage to sign your name to something you’ve written, you can do so the same. I do agree that what I said in this article has for the most part been said better by other people, and never claimed otherwise. If you’d like to read a more successful piece, [Kiese Laymon wrote something brilliant][1] over the holidays that’s well worth the read. I doubt you’ll find his argument any more persuasive than you found mine, but I have to appreciate any excuse to link to Kiese’s stuff. He’s good at what he does. [1]: http://colorlines.com/archives/2013/12/kiese_laymon_on_trayvon_black_manhood_and_love.html
#5103 | Author: Tom Head | Date: Jan 2 2014
Tomhead, And that’s where you are wrong. Because first of all, the Castle Doctrine was not involved in the Martin case (or the Stand Your Ground Law as it is known in Florida) and the same can be said of the Thomas case here because the Castle Doctrine does not cover shooting into an unoccupied vehicle, but only if you or passengers are in the vehicle and being attacked. The reason it is a very old idea is because it comes from English common law. It is a defense of your “castle,” your domain, your property, the lives of you, your family, and your guests, or others in danger. As to writing books, I usually write under a non de plume. However, I am a critic and write book reviews for the American Library Association, Booklist, and numerous other acquisitions so perhaps one of your book galleys will find its way into my stack to review. I shudder to think what I will find. As to the Laymon piece, please! I’m glad to get a glimpse into your thinking. You are way over the line, buster! I used to be a card-carrying member of the ACLU just like you. I dropped my membership because I am not going to support the rights of the KKK to march through town in their white robes and burn crosses on lawns, nor am I really interested in having some guy who says he’s a libertarian (whatever that means!) tell me that I cannot defend myself or my property from criminals especially since, in my youth, I spent some time in the jungles of Vietnam fighting for your liberty and the honor of this country. And while that war did not turn out so well, we who did our duty have earned this nation’s respect. If the Middle East is the Cradle of Civilization, then Africa is the Cradle of Humanity because we all came out of that continent some 50,000 or so years ago. Every person on Earth carries within them DNA from Africa, so in that sense we are all black.
#5104 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 2 2014
Turtleread, I noticed you didn’t actually comment on the content of Kiese Laymon’s article. That’s disappointing.
#5107 | Author: Tom Head | Date: Jan 2 2014
Tomhead, OK, your on! I was trying to be polite. It was like someone had thought that putting tattoos on their face and metal barbs through their mouth so they have difficulty in talking was fashionable, and then applying for a job at a bank, dry cleaner, or library and felt their feelings were hurt because the majority did not appreciate what they brought to the table as an employee. He, like you, lamented the situation as he saw it, but did not offer any positive solution or solutions or a way forward to resolve the problem. In other words, you can play with “victims” and victimology until the End of Time but that’s not going to get you down the road headed toward a solution, is it? What is it that will cause blacks to melt into American society? Or, is their own “culture” keeping them out? We’ve had Irish, Poles, Germans, Japanese, etc. and certainly lots of Hispanics. I guess that’s what I found most disappointing about his article, just the same old stuff with no real solution and not even a new direction. The Blame game. The solution of “We want you to love us unconditionally” is nonsense because only God can give such love. I, and others, work on verifiable trust. Come work in the real world and try to find those solutions. I challenge you to come up with some real world solutions for keeping kids like Thomas out of trouble, interested in school, and preparing them for trades and/or higher education or both. Look around, I think there is some movement in Jackson to make that happen.
#5111 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 3 2014
Turtleread, you’ve invested a great deal of time in this conversation. What exactly are you trying to accomplish?
#5117 | Author: Tom Head | Date: Jan 3 2014
Turtleread, you seem to imply that writing has no value unless it provides a solution. (“He, like you, lamented the situation as he saw it, but did not offer any positive solution or solutions or a way forward to resolve the problem.”) To accept that premise, I would have to discount every poem, every philosophical exploration and every prayer that doesn’t ask for a pony. How limited and boring that would make life! In “Letters to a Young Poet,” Ranier Maria Rilke wrote: “I would like to beg you dear Sir, as well as I can, to have patience with everything unresolved in your heart and to try to love the questions themselves as if they were locked rooms or books written in a very foreign language. Don’t search for the answers, which could not be given to you now, because you would not be able to live them. And the point is to live everything. Live the questions now. Perhaps then, someday far in the future, you will gradually, without even noticing it, live your way into the answer.” Both Tom Head and Kiese Laymon chose the path of asking big questions with few answers instead of advocating specific solutions. I highly recommend at least an attempt at the former from time to time, if only to remember that we have some connection to other human beings or something larger than our little selves, however you wish to define that. Cynicism is easy, as is condemnation and defensiveness. I know. The reality and trauma of our violent world seems to demand them simply to survive, and by your words, you have experienced more violence and trauma than most. To lament a need for *unreasonable* love (Laymon does not use the word “unconditional”) or grieve the loss of tenderness comes from softer places, or at least hearts that have yet to be completely hardened.
#5118 | Author: RonniM | Date: Jan 3 2014
You, Mr. RonniM, would receive an A+ in any of my classes. Very, very good! An excellent answer. No, I do not expect answers from every work of literature, philosophical exploration, or prayer. And BTW, prayer does not work that way, you receive what you need, generally not what you want (and you should be careful what you pray for!–LOL). However, as to Tom Head and Kiese Laymon, I’m afraid such bombastic idealism in which I suspend my real-world experience was left back in the 1960’s and early 1970’s. I find that practical social realism works better than failed hopes and dreams that never produced “for the greater good,” but only persisted in giving us failure, hopelessness, division, and despair. I think your last paragraph bears explanation. I am not a cynic, nor do I condemn, nor am I defensive about my opinions. They are grounded in English common law, this state has passed the Castle Doctrine, and many individuals in this state (white & black) support it. Think about it this way: Do you think it was easy for Mr. Williams to shoot Mr. Thomas on his property? No, I doubt it. He will have to bear that on his conscience for the rest of his life. And yet, who is the villain in the story? It seems everyone but Mr. Thomas. In business, if you come into your bosses’ office and present a problem without a solution or several possible solutions, that will get old fast and your employment will be short. Just remember that in this fast-paced world, not everyone is interested in exploring questions that have no answers. Again, good answer and I like your quote.
#5121 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 4 2014
Fair enough. Answer my question, I answered yours. What solution or solutions do you propose to fix the problem? List the problem, then give the solution(s) and why. Number them.
#5122 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 4 2014
Before comparing solutions, Mr. Bowles, we’d have to agree on what the problems are. I don’t think we do.
#5125 | Author: Tom Head | Date: Jan 4 2014
I think Mr. Head clearly outlined the problem (killing people who are not posing a physical threat to someone) and proposed an excellent solution (make it illegal to kill someone who isn’t threatening you with harm at that moment). It is deeply troubling to me that anyone believes that if we can’t create a society without criminals, then we should be allowed to kill anyone we perceive as threatening to us.
#5131 | Author: SusanM | Date: Jan 7 2014
It is already illegal to kill someone who isn’t threatening you with harm at that moment. Out of all of the incidents he cited, only one didn’t get placed in the hands of a jury. Zimmerman is the exception out of them since the jury allowed him to walk, but you can’t always control the outcome of a jury. If you disagree, look at OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony. The only “solution” Tom has proposed is to turn the other cheek.
#5133 | Author: js1976 | Date: Jan 7 2014
Quardious Johnson broke into a car. He wasn’t threatening anyone. So far, there has been no move to prosecute the man who killed him. Tom has not proposed that we turn the other cheek, and you know it. No one is going to be able to come up with a magic solution that would ensure no crimes are ever committed. This does not justify giving people the right to kill others who are posing no real threat.
#5135 | Author: SusanM | Date: Jan 7 2014
From what I have read, that’s exaclty what he is proposing. If you disagree, please take the time to read all of his comments related to this incident. Neither of us walked out that night to find someone in our vehicle, nor did we hear the conversation that followed. So it is just your assumption that Mr Williams was not threatened that night.
#5136 | Author: js1976 | Date: Jan 7 2014
And BTW, who is this Q. Johnson? Don’t you mean Mr. Thomas? I think if you are going to join a conversation and contribute to it, you should at least have sufficient command of the facts as known and the people involved.
#5137 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 8 2014
Js1976, OK, I agree down to the last sentence. No, you will not compare Tom Head to Jesus. What Tom has proposed is doing nothing and/or calling authorities, which is what people did before this Castle Doctrine law was passed. The police were late, they didn’t care, they rarely found the people, the courts rarely did much if they were caught and convicted, and it was more of a hassle for the victims than the criminals. Much like those people at the elderly apartment complex and surrounding neighborhood tonight. All four tires on their cars slashed. That’s easily $500 a car and with a $500 deductible and a fixed income. I think even Jesus could be Temple-angry at people who mistreat the elderly and poor for fun!
#5138 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 8 2014
It is deeply troubling to me that someone who does not even get the young man’s last name correct who was shot could then show so much concern over his dead body now. You don’t know if he didn’t threaten Mr. Williams, he fought the medical people trying to help him, he was wearing a leg monitor, and he had a criminal record. When one of these criminals gets on top of you, are you just going to take it and say he had a bad childhood? Or would you reach for the Colt pistol your daddy gave you that’s in your bedroom nightstand? You do know that if you do not stop people from abusing animals, they will abuse people. People who damage property, expensive property, unchecked, then go after houses, then break into unoccupied houses, then at some point occupied ones. In other words, it escalates.
#5139 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 8 2014
“No, you will not compare Tom Head to Jesus” Correction noted, still can’t stop laughing though!
#5152 | Author: js1976 | Date: Jan 9 2014
I apologize. I copied the man’s name wrong. But that doesn’t invalidate my argument. Not that it matters, because js1976 and most of the other regulars who comment here seem to see it more as a game than a legitimate attempt to come to some sort of understanding. I don’t comment more because I prefer to discuss issues with people who are genuinely trying to understand each other. But I do feel the need to comment sometimes because I want anyone reading these comment sections on JFP articles to know that the views of js1976 and others like him/her are not shared by everyone in the state. I think that’s worth taking a little abuse from people who are just interesting in picking fights.
#5153 | Author: SusanM | Date: Jan 9 2014
So true, SusanM. Unfortunately, people with archaic ideas too often dominate what comes out of Mississippi. We must balance it out with reason. Thank you for wading in. And no problem on getting the name wrong. That’s not nearly as bad as those who don’t understand the basic American principles that (a) we don’t execute people without a trial and (b) we don’t execute them for breaking car windows. Oh, and (c), we actually investigate accusations before we declare someone a criminal (or definitively not). Never mind “innocent until proved guilty”; we certainly don’t adhere to the back-ass notion of “executed before proved guilty.” That’s Taliban-level or Nazi-level thinking, or non-thinking. Sure, we’ve always had plenty of those attitudes in Mississippi, but that doesn’t mean we accept them, don’t respond to them or—certainly—allow them to dominate the way we run our criminal-justice system. Many, many Mississippians understand these things. Many who don’t seem to be the ones with the most time on their hands to post the same thing over and over and over again. Don’t let them shut you up. It’s our state, too.
#5156 | Author: Donna Ladd | Date: Jan 9 2014
Not sure why I’ve been singled out, you’ve recieved not even a “little abuse” from me.
#5158 | Author: js1976 | Date: Jan 9 2014
More than one commenter on this thread has demanded Tom Head come up with solutions. We already have plenty of solutions to crime. Law libraries are filled with them, and our prisons are filled to the brim as a result. “The home of the free” has more people in prison than any other nation on earth, and Mississippi has the second highest prison population in the U.S. What we haven’t done effectively is to deal with the causes of crime: poverty, adequate education, equal opportunity and so much more. I’m not saying that dealing with the problems are easy (they’re not) or that crime should not have consequences (it should). But desperate people don’t make good decisions; they do desperate things. Thomas’ death is reminder of that for both Thomas and Williams. We live in a violent and fearful world, exacerbated by those who capitalize on our fears to their benefit. We objectify others by labeling them, overgeneralizing and segmenting them, leading us to find solutions to defend against them. When criminals are “little sh-ts,” for example, we can more easily justify killing them. It becomes a lot harder to eliminate someone when we recognize them as another human being–just like us–albeit someone who has made some seriously sh-tty decisions. There but by the grace of God (or whatever your greater power is) go any of us. Tom should have added “fear” to his list–arrogance, greed, and pride–of why we have laws like Mississippi’s Castle Doctrine. Every genocide in history began with dehumanizing people, whether calling Native Americans “savages” or Muslims “infidels.” The Nazis labeled Jews “cockroaches,” and portrayed them as various other vermin. Enslaving, starving, gassing to death and burning human beings in ovens was the Nazi’s final “solution.” The either/or thinking on this subject is striking. Defending your property through homicide is extreme. A effective defense does not need to include death, but lethal weapons make it much more likely. Thomas did not have a gun. I can’t help thinking that if Williams didn’t have one, either, that the outcome would have been Williams filing an insurance claim and more jail time for Thomas. Instead, Thomas is dead, and Williams will live with having taken a life. There’s no reversing either one, and that’s a tragedy with absolutely no winners.
#5159 | Author: RonniM | Date: Jan 9 2014
Most of the people in prison and/or jails in our country are in for drugs, and of those most are for pot possession. Tagged with the crime, mostly young black men. Blacks make up only 13% of the US population and that number has held steady for decades. The problem is not just separate issues and/or an aspect here or there of our society, it’s the whole society. It does not work for significant numbers of Americans any more. Perhaps doing away with all public assistance programs and just creating a Sovereign Wealth Fund for the US in which every citizen would receive a check every month would work. The idea that criminals are “little sh*ts” so we can more easily kill them is more than amusing to me. Do you think it’s very amusing to the policemen who responded to the bank robbery recently? One police officer killed, the other shot and in the hospital. Then, a nation-wide manhunt. Why do you have no compassion for the victims? Do you have no compassion for Mr. Williams? How about those policemen? What about those people at the elderly complex in West Jackson and neighborhood who had their tires slashed recently? Are you suffering from “Stockholm syndrome?” And stop with the Nazi references! We are not practicing genocide against criminals. Criminals are setting up the terms of their own demise by continuing to commit extremely violating crimes, even on property that they do not own. An effective defense before the Castle Doctrine would have been your fists and/or a baseball bat, but you could be sued then. So all you could do is call the police, yell at them, and stand helplessly by while they stole your car, valuables in your car, damaged your car, or even tried to enter your house. Now to the bottom line, who are the winners: Under the law as it stands, the public because it can take deadly force if needed, without having to wait for the police; police, because it’s less work for them, D.A. office, also less work and less money; city, county, state: less work, fewer employees, less money, fewer taxes, happy taxpayers, no food, shelter, clothing, health care for inmates for years, sometimes decades; cleans the gene pool.
#5161 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 9 2014
As long as you are penning a love letter, you might make mention that we also don’t allow our newspaper editors to make law or enforce it either. The courts and police must do their duties without personal bias or opinion (or at least, that’s what we expect). BTW, one of my ancestors was in the “Swamp Fox” unit that took on the British Southern Army, harassed it, defeated it, and ultimately brought about the defeat of the British during the American Revolution, and the founding of the United States of America.
#5162 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 9 2014
LOL!
#5163 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 9 2014
Your last paragraph literally started with “stop with the Nazi references” and ended with “cleans the gene pool.” Just sayin.
#5164 | Author: Todd Stauffer | Date: Jan 10 2014
That’s priceless. Sometimes this is too easy. Smh.
#5165 | Author: Donna Ladd | Date: Jan 10 2014
Susan are you suggesting we allow others to break into our cars, garage, homes, etc. and rely completely on police response to take care of the situation? I guess it’s the southern white redneck in me but watching someone blatantly take what is mine simply because they decided they wanted it and making no attempt other than a useless phone call to stop them just doesn’t make sense. They’ll come, fill out a police report and tell you to call your insurance company and no one will make any attempt to recover your stolen property. Nor will any attempt be made to find out who the thief was. A criminal is well aware of what he or she is when they make the choice just as they are well aware of the potential outcome of their actions. It blows my mind that a lot of people who were no where near the investigation feel as thought THEIR opinion is the only right one. And the rest believe we should just allow others to take what they want. I live in a good neighborhood now but I haven’t always had that luxury. Let’s see how you handle the situation when they come after you
#5166 | Author: Scott1962 | Date: Jan 10 2014
If a man breaks into your home while you are there alone Donna will you wait to see if he’s planning on robbing/raping you before you make a decision of what to do? Or, if you have a weapon will you protect yourself first? It’s easy to coach from the stands but things are much different on the field.
#5167 | Author: Scott1962 | Date: Jan 10 2014
Somewhere between JFP’s stand on all this and this turtle person there lies a compromise, I have to believe that. I have two teenage sons with several black friends who I’m pretty sure turtle would implicate immediately if he saw them and he would be wrong. They are young black males and they are typical teenagers worrying about girls, image, and to a lesser extent their futures. But…. having watched these kids grow up I know they have ambitions, hopes, and dreams of what they’ll accomplish in life. They have good parents, strong families, and their ambitions have exactly zero to do with sports. These young men would be part of that gene pool you want to clean and the perfect example of why your argument appears to originate not in a clarity of the situation but rather from a generalization of people of a certain persuasion. I know I’m getting off the subject but these are one generation removed from the vicious cycle that has so black communities in it’s grip. And it’s simply because they had parents who went out and did something with their lives instead of subscribing to the democrats assertion that they can’t because the decks stacked against them. And the end result is a beautiful thing to see, that being there isn’t an ounce of difference between those kids and my kids, and environment is the factor not race. When you stop looking at people as individuals and instead lump them into one category like the Jackson Free Press does then your solutions are irrelevant. People are individuals with different beliefs, morals, and ambitions and should be treated as such. You wanted the man dead because he’s black. JFP wants a closed case reopened because he’s black. When you look at what actually happened then there’s no way a grand jury would indict the homeowner, all this is just another soap box for you and JFP to get on in an attempt to validate the prejudices that exist on either side.
#5168 | Author: Scott1962 | Date: Jan 10 2014
“Most of the people in prison and/or jails in our country are in for drugs, and of those most are for pot possession. Tagged with the crime, mostly young black men. Blacks make up only 13% of the US population and that number has held steady for decades.” Reference?
#5169 | Author: tsmith | Date: Jan 10 2014
@Scott1962 Herein lies the risk you assume when you try to make other people’s arguments for them. When you say “JFP wants a closed case reopened because he’s black” … this is an complete mischaracterization. Editorially, we’re on the record on THIS INDIVIDUAL CASE as saying we’re concerned that there was no actual investigation into what happened, and that the Castle Doctrine may have been inappropriately applied in this case given the circumstances. The ethnicity of the parties involved might be interesting sociologically, but it has nothing to do with our argument in this individual case. The fact that you happen to know that a grand jury wouldn’t indict this case is… interesting… but I respectfully suggest that decision might be better left to the actual grand jury. Their decision (as opposed to yours) would be based on a careful investigation… that didn’t happen. We lament that fact and hope to affect change. It’s convenient to your argument to suggest that we’re incapable of understanding that people are individuals; however, your crystal ball is fuzzy when it comes to seeing what’s in our heads — much less actually comprehended what’s been written. Here’s the takeaway: Make your argument, certainly, but maybe let other people characterize their own? That’s part of disagreeing agreeably.
#5170 | Author: Todd Stauffer | Date: Jan 10 2014
I know you don’t know “this turtle person,” but one of my sisters is married into a famous Hollywood minority family. I respect every black family trying to raise their children right, and hope that the community will become aware enough to provide opportunities and reach out to those families and individual children that need help. However, the days of doing nothing and/or preventing the homeowner from doing nothing to protect his “castle” are over and what brought that about was not us “backward thinking immoral rednecks,” but the tactics of overly bold criminals themselves.
#5171 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 10 2014
The first two sentences have come from reading over many years and shows on MSNBC, including recently the Rachel Maddow Show, Chris Hayes, and Lawrence O’Donnell show. The 13% figure is an average figure. As of 2012, it is 13.1% according to Quick Facts, put out by the Census Bureau of the US Government.
#5172 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 10 2014
The Nazis are over and done with, and so is that “Greatest Generation” batcrap stuff too! Sure, they were great, but they had to be. You think we were not great because we went to Vietnam? You want state-sponsored evil? Try Idi Amin’s regime, or perhaps Dick Cheney’s? Hit a nerve there? If you cannot understand the differences between Nazis and the way they operated and the Castle Doctrine, then perhaps you are not fit to be in the role you are in. Just sayin’.
#5173 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 10 2014
Yes, it is. And I doubt I can help you with the Thomas case as I have not even heard back after more than a week of inquiry to my sources to try to get an investigation going, which means nobody wants to touch it! You are NOT a beacon of light, you are a storm full of “sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
#5174 | Author: Turtleread | Date: Jan 10 2014
Recent Immigration Stories
The Mississippi Free Press produced this story through the MFP Solutions Lab, supported by the Solutions Journalism Network. This series digs into Mississippi’s systemic issues and sheds light on responses to them in other communities. Beyond just reporting on problems, these stories interrogate their causes and inspect potential solutions.