Skip to main content

GOP: "We love freedom, but it's the protesters' fault for practicing the First Amendment!"

Due to police officers Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo not being indicted for the killings of two unarmed black men, Michael Brown and Eric Garner, there has been a nationwide protest against police brutality in recent weeks. Now, just days removed from the tragic killings of New York City police officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos by Ismaaiyl Brinsley, the GOP has made its opinion heard loud and clear on the matter: "It's the protesters' fault!"

That's right; the party of "freedom" has decried people of practicing their First Amendment rights through peaceful protests (for the most part) against police brutality and blamed them for the murders of two police officers, whose job it is to protect our lives, and with that, our freedoms.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani had this to say about the matter:

"We've had four months of propaganda, starting with the president, that everybody should hate the police. The protests are being embraced, the protests are being encouraged. The protest, even the ones that don't lead to violence, a lot of them lead to violence, all of them lead to a conclusion. The police are bad, the police are racist. That is completely wrong."

New York Representative Peter King added the following:

"It's really time for our national leaders, the president, it's time for the mayor of New York, and really for many in the media to stop the cop bashing, to stop this anti-police rhetoric."

Missouri Senator Roy Blunt also chimed in with this:

"Piling on to the police and the equipment that they're using, particularly when you really don't explain what's out there in a way that's helpful... You got to the police out there protecting the protesters and themselves and being constantly criticized for everything they're doing and now that may be from that constant criticism something may have gotten into this man's head. We have to wonder about was there anything going on in the national discussion that led to the deaths of those two officers."

The GOP chorus is off-key here on a number of levels. First off, they can't pretend that Ismaaiyl Brinsley was an upstanding, law-abiding citizen before these murders, and somehow, through the recent protests, went from Mister Rogers to Rambo Manson. Brinsley was 28-years-old and had already been arrested for the following crimes: Theft and robbery in Ohio, as well as robbery, shoplifting, carrying a concealed weapon, disorderly conduct, and obstruction of a police officer in Georgia. He'd also been arrested in Brooklyn, where his family resides. Not only that, but it's now believed that Brinsley had ties to a prison gang which has advocated violence against the police. So, with all of that history and baggage, it'd be utterly foolish to blame peaceful protesters for his continued string of violence.

Secondly, the GOP fails at their attempt of taking a college-level critical thinking course. The "false dilemma" is considered an informal fallacy for a reason - it lacks logic. It simply isn't logical to say, "You're either with the cops or you're against them!" That misses the broader picture. Protesters have been speaking out against police officers abusing their power, not of police officers in general. Speaking of generalities, protesters aren't saying all cops are "bad" or "racist," as many in the GOP are now saying. That, once again, would be illogical. Just because a handful of police officers may have been caught abusing power to the point of a person's ultimate demise, that doesn't mean all, or even 25% of police officers have done or ever would do such a thing.

Lastly, and most importantly, it all comes down to accountability and justice. This is not a pro-cops versus anti-cops debate, and people like Rudy Giuliani sound like 7-year-olds when they speak like that. Just as protesters feel the cops responsible for the killings of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Tamir Rice should be held accountable for abusing their powers, we also feel that way about the killings of Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos.

As the Black Lives Matter organization said following the tragic killings of the two New York City police officers, "An eye for an eye is not our vision of justice. We know all too well the pain and the trauma that follows the senseless loss of our family members and loved ones."

All Lives Matter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/21/ismaaiyl-brinsley-cop-killer_n_6362298.html

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/12/21/3606040/rudy-giuliani-2-nyc-cops-were-killed-because-obama-told-everyone-to-hate-the-police/

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/12/22/3606191/senator-claims-ferguson-protesters-criticism-of-police-led-to-the-nyc-cop-killing/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"