OCR Text |
Show May 11, 1992 The Signpost 5 King verdict was fair; rampant racism runs black on white, too To the editor, In the wake of the acquittal of the four Los Angeles police officers involved in the Rodney King beating, a vast majority of Americans have become enraged and have claimed that justice has not been served. I disagree. The police officers use the "minimum force necessary" to apprehend an individual who was resisting arrest. They followed established procedures by attempting to restrain and handcuff their suspect, but when he as able to "throw off" four officers, wasn't affect by two jolts from a stun gun, and exhibited signs that he may have been under the influence of amind-altering drug, the baton became the minimum force. We watched a videotape of the incident from a distance and judged the officers guilty, because we empathized with King and wanted the officers punished so it may never happen to us. The jurors, however, were burdened with proof, and after weeks of testimony applied the laws and found in the only just manner-that the officers performed their duties as directed and were not to be held personally responsible for the incident. Why were there no blacks on the jury? During the jury selection process, a representative from the NAACP contacted each of the black prospective jurors which subsequently resulted in their dismissal. One root of the problem is that we ask police officers to protect us and enforce the law, but we give them a limited amount of equipment with which to their job. We have the power to change any or all of the procedures that police may use in the performance of their duties through the election of the government officials that represent us. The racially charged reaction to the verdict highlights the second root of the problem: racial and sexual discrimination are polarizing this country. We point fingers at the David Dukes of the world while a panoply of racists including the likes of Reverends Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson run around the country espousing racial rhetoric that drives the wedge of hatred deeper into the hears and minds of the uneducated. Browse through the scholarship section of the la w school catalog of any private law school. There are scholarships for "a female with high academic standing," "an Afro-American with demonstrated financial need," "Asian student concerned with public service," or a "black, female night student," but you will never see one that says "to the whi te male ..." because that would be discrimination. Theothersthat make a person's race a factor are equally discriminatory. Scholarships and financial aid programs that target a specific race or sex are discriminatory. WSU's Women's Studies Program is an excellent example of blatant sexism. A program that focuses on gender roles and issues as they apply to any or all aspects of our world is a worthwhile addition, but to alienate an entire gender in the process is wrong, and violates the spirit and intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which is the driving force behind the university's policy "to provide opportunity in all its programs and activities ... without regard to race, age, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, veterans or marital status." It is, in short, sexism. Why a Women's Resource Center? Are women inherently less capable and therefore in greaterneed of assistance? I don't believe so. It is but another example of socialized sexual discrimination.Martin Lu ther Ki ng Jr.' s drea m that all of God's children live in harmony has made us all sensitive to racial injustices against women and minorities, but the rime has come to sensitize ourselves to all discrimination, regardless of its orientation. The pendulum has swung beyond center to the other extreme, and it is time we move again toward s the goal of a color and gender blind society. Henry David Thoreau wrote, "There are a thousand backing at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." Demonstrating against the verdict can't bring justice. Curtis A. Wolfe WSU student BP U 1 ) 1 n ...IF YOU CAN FIND A BETTER VALUE ON YOUR FINE DIAMOND PURCHASES. Compare and save! GUARANTEE: if your diamond doc nol pprabc for 44 more than purchase prkc wtthln M hy, wt will refund your mortej. 1 quote 2nd quote our prkc DIAMOND DREAM WHOLESALE DIAMOND BROKER Scott Russell Vr V '533 26th St OGDEN WE ARE A TRUE DIAMOND WHOLESALER Do not hide your eyes from realities of King verdict To the editor, I am writing in response to The Signpost's editorial of 5-4-92, "Time Will Prove Rodney King to be a Poor Martyr." I only hope this convoluted, rambling, unclear piece of editorial gibberish is the result of poor journalistic style rather than an attempt to provide readers with some insight concerning events that took place in California during the last week in April. From the tone of the first three paragraphs of the editorial, I get the distinct impression that you feel things would have been much better off if the Rodney King incident had not been videotaped. That the beating inflicted on Mr. King wasn't wrong, but rather publicizing of the videotape was. Following that line of thinking, I can only wonder what you would have written about Watergate? If only ex-President Nixon hadn't made his tapes, maybe we would still trust the government. Yes, while ignorance can be blissful, it can also be very dangerous. I find this line of reasoning unsound in any individual, but coming from someone studying journalism is all but incomprehensible. You state America became convinced "that King was merely in the wrong place at the wrong time." Aside from the presumptuous remark about what America is convinced of, you miss the whole point of what happened that night Mr. King was pulled over by the LAPD. Wrong place and wrong time were not the determining factors. The fact is Mr. King was the "wrong" color. In reality, had Rodney King been white, nothing would have occurred. Hence, no videotape, no trial, and yes Mr. Editor, no delay in the all-important NBA Playoffs. A logical progression? Per haps, but founded on aout-of-sight, out-of-mind mentality that is as foolish as it is dangerous. When you remark that when those "infamous images from tha t videotape begin to fade ... we can consider the evidence against King ..." I should inform you that Mr. King was not on trial, and since the videotape was the strongest piece of evidence against the police officers, who were on trial, I can only guess as to why you would like to see it fade from our consciousness. Perhaps the phrase "Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" rings a little too true in this case. However, Ed i tor May, you and I do agree on one point. Mr. Rodney King was not the real martyr in this case. The real martyr, once again, was justice. Clark Taylor WSU staff Black Scholars United of Weber State University Present Annual Awards & Recognition Banquet Saturday May 30, 1992 Weber State Skyroom Weber State University Ogden, Utah 6:00 pm -10:00 pin Semi-formal Donation: $25 Couple $15 Single for (icket information: Call Chris or Raycine 626-7330 |