“If we take an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, we end up a nation of blind, toothless people.” — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
I awoke to di
scover police officers were killed – murdered – in Dallas, likely as a response to police matters in other communities. The assassination of the police officers are suspected to be connected, as retribution, for the killing of two men by police in the previous 48 hours.
The New York Post headline today is “Civil War.” The New York Post is not a paper I read, but the headline made it to my home page. And we all know that headline writers are gifted at distillation.
Black lives matter. White lives matter. Blue-uniformed lives matter. Gay lives matter. Christian lives, Jewish lives, Muslim lives, Hindu lives, Atheist lives matter. Lives matter.
Malcolm X, toward the end of his short life, shifted his views away from the radical teachings of Elijah Muhammad. Malcolm X said, after this shift, “ballots, not bullets.”
The police officer in Baton Rouge, and the police officer in Minnesota, deserve a fair trial. The attacker in Dallas would too, just as Dylan Roof, the Charleston church shooter does. Roof’s attorneys, reportedly have offered a guilty plea to murder in exchange for no death penalty. Would this be, or not be, justice “for the victims”?
This is an example of a linguistic usage that peeves me. I recognize justice as something that is part of a civil society. There is no justice for Alton Sterling of Baton Rouge, or Philandro Castile, of Minnesota. There is justice. Having a preconceived notion as to what might constitute justice might work for a lynch mob, but not for civilized society. It is for the community, not for a sole individual.
I hear people say there must be justice for someone, some specific person. Justice is for all. The concept of justice for a particular victim strikes me as confused. I think it often is equated with finding guilty the person we think did wrong, and then punishing that person. Was it Judge Roy Bean, “The Law West of the Pecos,” who said, “we’re gonna give that skunk a fair trial, and then we’re gonna hang him”?
It sounds as if the police in these two cases took lives needlessly. If that is proven, 
justice requires they be held fully accountable. That would be justice for the victims, justice for the shooters and justice for the community.
Of course, our system of justice is imperfect. We see examples of what strike us as overly light sentences, as for the convicted rapist, the swimmer at University of California, sentenced to six months of probation. We see what strikes us as overly harsh punishment, like prison sentences for drug possession.
Justice must be carried out fairly and impartially to be worthy of the name. The symbol of justice is a woman with a blindfold, holding scales. Justice does not see pigmentation or apparel. The scales suggest weighing two sides against one another. There is no thumb on the scales in the imagery of Lady Justice.
I think the officers involved in the two recent shootings should be held accountable for their actions. If found guilty of crimes, then they should be sentenced. That doesn’t make me a black militant, nor am I anti-police.
In the same way, anyone involved with the sniper attacks on the police in Dallas should be held accountable for their actions. That doesn’t make me a zealot for law and order. These beliefs come from what I am. An American.
“Liberty & Justice For All”? It can never be, even though we live under the premise that it can be.
I say this simply because, justice is something that is assumed or not by individual perception. A perfect example is the Hillary/Comey imbroglio. Some would say justice has been served. Some would say the whole thing was a miscarriage of justice for even being investigated. And yet others would claim no justice, in that she was not indicted.
And I have to say, the same differences will be a product of whatever is decided about the investigations in Minneapolis and Baton Rouge.