Getting pulled over and livng to tell about it

I've had some experience with being pulled over by law enforcement, but not recently, thank goodness. My pullovers have resulted in tickets for speeding and in kind warnings to get that taillight fixed or pay closer attention to my driving. But never did I fear being beaten or shot by an officer who pulled me over.

That's why the shooting death of Philandro Castile during a traffic stop is so shocking to me. I would never imagine that an officer would pull his weapon and shoot me as I sat in the driver's seat. Yet, it happened to Castile. It was captured on video. It inspired scores of protests. But the end result was this: Castile died after being pulled over because of a faulty taillight.

Righteous protests after the shooting devolved at times into a fiction that cops are fighting a war against black men. That is as false as any other racially charged conspiracy claim. There is no war, but there appears to be a lack of understanding and a lack of communication.

Castile was licensed to carry a firearm, and he told the officer that he had a firearm in the car. He may not have provided that explanation, however, in the manner prescribed in concealed-carry classes. The officer apparently heard the weapon explanation as a threat and saw Castile's reaching for his identification as reaching for a weapon. Was race — and perhaps fear of black males — a factor in the cop's misinterpretation? Probably.

This is a shooting that never should have happened. It is a situation when the service weapon never should have been drawn, unless, as some have suggested, the officer thought Castile was the armed robber he had been alerted about. But that scenario would have triggered a different protocol involving calling for backup and requiring the driver to exit the vehicle with his hands up.

The last time I was pulled over, the Wilson officer approached my car, touching the left rear fender as she walked to my window. (I assume she was marking the car with her fingerprint in case anything went wrong and my car had to be identified by her fingerprint.) She asked if I knew one taillight was out. I respectfully told her I didn't (which was the truth). She told me to get it fixed as soon as possible. I promised her I would, and she returned to her vehicle and drove on.

I went home, then to the store and bought a taillight bulb and replaced the burned-out bulb.

End of story.

But had I appeared threatening or belligerent — even short-tempered — things might have ended differently. Had my skin been darker AND my demeanor had been more confrontational, things almost assuredly would have ended differently.

No indictment in Ferguson shooting

A grand jury in Missouri has ruled. There will be no indictment in the shooting of Michael Brown by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson.

That conclusion to an extended grand jury session comes as something of a surprise, despite some predictions that no indictment would be handed up. Details of the shooting are in dispute. The officer's account differs from that of some eyewitnesses. The forensic evidence of gunshot angles and wounds seems to support the officer's version, but it still seemed to leave room for charges less than first-degree murder — manslaughter, perhaps, based on a contention that the officer used excessive force to fend off the larger but unarmed teenager.

The death of an unarmed teenager is tragic and appalling, but what followed the grand jury decision is nearly as appalling, more destructive and less excusable. Thousands of protesters took to the streets in a rampage of destruction, throwing rocks at police, torching a car, breaking store windows, burning buildings and looting businesses. Those who lost their property to the rampage were not responsible for the shooting or for the grand jury decision. Their only offense was owning property. Some have charged that the more violent protesters were not Ferguson residents but had come from far away to take advantage of the rage in Ferguson.

Shootings of unarmed people by police is all-too-common in America. These incidents must be prevented through better police training, changes in attitude and culture and improvements in mutual respect. Violent riots do not improve the situation.

One aspect of this shooting follows a familiar pattern. Initial descriptions of the shooting victim, Michael Brown, portrayed him as a sweet, lovable teen who wouldn't hurt a fly. Subsequently, surveillance video showed him shoplifting and then physically threatening and shoving a much smaller store clerk. The autopsy showed he had been consuming marijuana. None of this justifies the shooting, but it should remind news consumers that not everyone who is the victim of a suspicious police shooting or who is accused of a crime is sweet and innocent. Exaggerations of the victim's character are no more helpful than exaggerations of the shooter's character or perception of danger. 

An addendum to my post:

I have since read testimony given by Officer Darren Wilson, who says the teen who attacked him ran away after he fired shots from inside his vehicle. Wilson then chased him, and the teen stopped, turned and came toward him. Wilson shot him from several feet away, firing the fatal shot into his head as the teen fell to the ground.

While I think it is dangerous to second-guess a grand jury, or any jury, I find it hard to understand why Wilson's actions were not considered excessive force. With the suspect running from him, Wilson was in no immediate danger. The final, fatal shot was fired after the suspect was seriously wounded and likely incapable of further resistance. An indictment for assault or involuntary manslaughter might have given a jury an opportunity to judge the actions of both Wilson and Brown.

Nevertheless, none of this justifies the wanton destruction perpetrated by mobs of protesters last night. Brown's own father appealed for the public to avoid violence and keep any protests peaceful. This destructiveness sullies Brown's memory.

Police arrest reporters who are doing their jobs

I have no idea what happened in Ferguson, Missouri, when a black teenager was killed by police bullets. I do know that the police there are not making themselves look good with their military gear and aggressive tactics. They are arresting reporters?

I am reminded, uncomfortably, of the complaints 50 years ago about "outside agitators" stirring up the local populace. Reporters were blamed then, too, and roughed up by police. Karl Fleming, who began his newspaper career in Wilson and went on to cover the civil rights movement for Newsweek out of the Atlanta bureau, wrote in his "Son of the Rough South" memoir about precautions reporters in Mississippi and Alabama took at the height of the civil rights protests. They holed up in motel rooms with the door barricaded and would not open the door at night. They kept watch over the parking lot for suspicious vehicles that might carry gangs out to frighten or kill them.

In Ferguson, police are arresting reporters and bullying them in a McDonald's restaurant for no apparent reason. Perhaps worse is the militarization of local police in the past couple of decades. Even small-town police have armored vehicles and heavy weapons that make them look like a military force instead of local law enforcement.

I don't know what happened to spark the unrest in Ferguson, but I do know that what the unrest has shown us about police there is disturbing.