Charles M. Blow has a really perfectly stated and straight to the point piece about the
Walter Scott homicide.
I find it particularly disturbing the way that we try to
find excuses for killings, the way that we seek to deprecate a person
when they have been killed rather than insisting that they deserved to
remain among the living.
For me, there is only one issue in the Walter Scott case: he is dead,
and that cannot be undone. And not only was he killed, but he was
killed in a most dishonorable way: shot in the back as he fled. So, for
me there is only one question: Should the dead man be dead? Is there
anything, under American jurisprudence and universal moral law, that
justifies the taking of this man’s life?
Mr. Blow points out that neither the traffic stop nor the ensuing charges that
would have been filed (resisting arrest, child support) come with a death sentence.
READ MORE
No comments:
Post a Comment