The other day I was riding on a side street through town and a truck pulled up beside me and the older gentleman inside asked, very politely, "Why don't you ride on the bike path? Seems like it would be a lot safer." At the moment I did not have a great response, but at the bottom line, I was riding on the street because I can. You see, in my town many of the bike paths are wide, straight, and smooth. In fact, there really is not a good reason not to use them in some places. Of course, when there are no paths, or if there are other people on them that are not going as fast as me, then it doesn't make sense. But generally speaking, "just because I can" is not a good reason for doing something.
I am deeply troubled by some of the voices that I hear coming from the halls of Congress. An untimely death, for whatever reason, is a tragedy. But the floor of the House is no place for the hateful rhetoric surrounding the recent untimely death in Florida. I actually heard our elected Representatives naming the act a murder and an execution. Were they there? Did they see? Have they determined that they will be both jury and judge in this matter?
Certainly it may turn out that this young man's death was a murder and that someone will be charged, tried, and convicted. But law enforcement (of this kind) is generally a state and local matter--not a federal matter. And law enforcement is an Executive branch function, not a legislative branch responsibility. It is tragic enough that this boy died an early death, why do some in Congress see the need to add insult to the tragedy by twisting a terrible loss into a political sound bite--just because they can.
Maybe the interests of justice would be better served if those who are responsible for law enforcement were allowed to do their job in an environment that has not been tainted by Washington's inflammatory rhetoric. Justice may move more slowly than some politicians would like, but trial and conviction in the courtroom of the sound bite is a perversion of justice that the blindfolded Lady would not recognize--and would never condone. At worst it is a lynching of sorts, and at best it is treading the downward edge of a slippery slope.
If a grand jury sees fit to indict, and a jury finds evidence to convict, then a court should sentence. But the House floor is neither the grand jury room, the courtroom, nor the judge's bench. I can only hope that when the TV cameras get pointed at the next tragedy and the microphones turn to new sound bites, that Lady Justice can resume her quiet, steady quest for a right and just outcome.
Pressing on,
-Ken
The Persistent Journey -- toward authentic living in an inauthentic world
2 comments:
The more facts that appear over time reveal that "every argument is convincing until you hear the other side" and that the only exercise some people get is jumping to conclusions. Give the investigations time (but not too much).
I think there's also a high percentage of congressional employees that have (to some extent) that crusader mentality. And I'm sure a certain amount of that is inherrent to the job, otherwise why go through the trouble to get elected to it? But I think you nail it when you say "because they can." This whole system was built with the genius intent of checks and balances that prevent crusaders from doing damage. If I had a magic wand I'd tweak the checks and balances to account for these new generation factors like immediate communication, quid pro quo private interest lobbying, the education cures all mindset, etc. All of these massive cultural and technological factors weigh against those balances... in my opinion.
Post a Comment