Just for the record...

[johnpalmer]

...I'd like to say that, if you arrest a famous professor, when it is clear that he was not a danger to himself or others, even if he was being an ass (which I don't consider proven, merely alleged), causing a nationwide bit of chatter about possible racism and abuse of police power, you have, indeed, acted "stupidly".

Even if your actions were lawful and justifiable, there was no compelling need to perform the arrest, and it caused problems that could have been avoided by other, more sensible, actions, like having one of the other officers on the scene deal with the troublesome resident while you de-stress.

To dispense with some of the complaints I've seen:

The issue is not whether or not the police should have responded to the reported break-in. The issue was whether or not the police should have arrested a man who wasn't harming anyone, and whose only crime *might* be yelling while in a stressful situation.

Yes, you should be friendly and cooperative with police, but even if you're not, they are still not supposed to arrest you unless and until you are doing more than being upset.

And maybe Gates was "lucky" that he only spent a few hours in jail for the behavior that is alleged by the police. Yes, there are criminals with badges who would have caused him actual physical harm if he was "mouthing off" to them. But if it took significant amounts of luck for him not to be beaten by police, then it's not Gates' alleged mouthing off that was the problem, it's the composition of the police.

Comments

[erin-c-1978.livejournal.com]

Damn straight. I find it incredibly disturbing when the generally good advice of "be polite to the police" turns into "if you're not polite to the police, it's morally permissible for them to beat or arrest you even if you've committed no crime."