The Gates’ Controversy

The President is a slow learner in some areas; in others I admire the fact that he appears to bow to reality and learn from facts. A president of the United States has no business commenting on something criminal especially when he himself admits ignorance of all the facts. It seems evident to me that police officers come a “bit thin-skinned” when it comes to encountering loud abusive behavior.

I had two brothers who served as police officers for some years (in the interest of full disclosure). I also watched police officers casually abuse the homeless years ago. I know fully well there are two sides to each story. What seems evident from the facts that have come out so far is that Gates lost his temper and his cool, evidently calling the officer names and being specifically insulting.

I can sort of see myself in Gates’ position—he is surprised by a stranger in the confines of his own home, a place that should be safe for every homeowner. But he is supposed to be an adult, capable of reigning himself in, not giving himself to ranting diatribes. The policeman was doing his job. What was his job? Protecting the home and property of Gates himself.

Police officers are subjected to casual abuse all too frequently by the lower echelons of our society. The casual abuse often turns to violence or implied harm to the officer himself. I suspect this is why we observe the “thin-skinned behavior” of so many officers. They themselves fear for their safety.

Even if the above observation were not true (as it very probably is), Gates found himself opposing the very man whose job it was to protect his own life and property. Now I think there are two probable outcomes that are bad for Gates, and perhaps bad for fellow professors that live in that neighborhood.

The first problem seems to be one of what I call advertising for criminals. Every burglar in the world now has official notification of open season in this neighborhood. What civic minded neighbor will now call the police when they see a door being broken into?

The second problem is even worse. What policeman will quickly respond to calls from this neighborhood, knowing they might face ridicule from the president of the United States.

Occam’s razor, applied here, seems to draw two easy conclusions, contrary to what our president concluded. Was there sufficient reason for the neighbor to report a possible burglary? Was there sufficient reason for the policeman to want to verify Gates’ id?
It is obvious that the answer is yes to both questions. For either Gates or the president to assume that skin color was a primary inducement is forcing unnecessary conclusions to the event.

Both the president and Gates owe a profound apology to the officer involved. As a country, we have better things to get on to.