Missing the Point on the Gates Arrest
Today, President Obama attended the White House press briefing to state that he “could have calibrated those words differently” when he stated that the Cambridge police officer who arrested Henry Louis Gates Jr. acted stupidly. To sum up what happened, Gates, a Harvard professor and leading authority on race, locked himself out of his house. Neighbors witnessed two black men (Gates and an associate) breaking into a house and called the police. The police arrived, questioned Gates, who took offense, and eventually the police arrested Gates. Both sides claim that the other was at fault, and many of the claims center around the police being racist and Gates refusing to cooperate. This matter, however, is not only about civil rights, it is about civil liberties.
Now it is certainly plausible to think none of this would have happened if Gates were white. It might be less likely that neighbors would have called the police if they saw a white person locked out of their house. It’s also plausible that the interaction between Gates and police would have gone differently if they were of the same race, but all of that misses the point. Because we are so worried about race we are failing to question why the police even have the right to question or arrest a person who refused to show ID. I am not a Constitutional or Massachusetts law expert,В but I question to authority of the police to ask you to produce ID simply because a neighbor called. In other words, what would happen if, every time I see someone I don’t know (or don’t like) doing something, I would call the police.
The Fourth Amendment protects us from unlawful searches by the police, and I am certainly unclear what it was that Gates was doing wrong. There is no law that says I have to use a key to enter my house. If its my property, I am free to break in each and every time. The altercation occurred largely because Gates refused, in the police account, to show ID. I don’t know the specific Massachusetts law, but in most states you are only required to identify yourself if held by police for committing a crime. In other words, since Gates was not committing a crime, there is no legal requirement that he identify himself. Furthermore, there is no law in the US that one carries ID. Even when driving, one is really simply carrying proof of an operator’s license, not an ID.
The racial aspect of the Gates arrest misses the point that the state and its police are daily infringing upon our right to move freely about our business. I understand that cooler heads should have prevailed, Gates should have said it’s my house, the police should have laughed and helped him inside. It’s certainly what happened when I was witnessed by the police breaking into my car. The fact that Gates was arrested, however, should disturb not only those interested in civil rights, but also, civil liberties.
July 24, 2009 |
Posted in: Policy |
Author: Charles | 
Print
4 Responses
From what I have read, Gates was not arrested because he refused to show identification. He was arrested for “disorderly conduct” for being combative with the officers (one of which is black).
He was combative, from my understanding, because the officers refused to leave him the hell alone. There is no requirement that he has to cooperate with the police. What he really should have done was walked inside and locked the door.
CNN’s interview with Sgt Leon Lashley, the black officer at the Gates arrest, is quite disturbing. He said Gates’ behavior was disruptive, situation getting out of control because other people were around and could hear. When AC asked, if he’s in his own home fussing, why not just leave him there, Sgt lashley replied that Gates had stepped outside (onto his front porch)and therefore Lashley would also have arrested Gates.
Who decides what “in control” means on your own front porch, law-abiding you, or the police? Short of any threat of course, is it illegal for a homeowner to “talk back” to police, insult or even yell at them in frustration, on private property?
This raises a serious 4th amendment question about police authority in a non-lawbreaking, non-threatening situation.
Here is a much more eloquent piece from Reason: http://www.reason.com/news/show/135039.html
Please continue discussion on the forum: link
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.