Editor’s note: This commentary is by Jim Tomczak, of Milton, who is 62, works at a golf course and is paying close attention to our society and writing poetry at will.
There is a scene in Robert Altman’s 1971 revisionist Western “McCabe & Mrs. Miller” that is jolting and disturbing. The movie offers a de-romanticized version of the later settlement of the American West, full of muddy streets, ramshackle shacks, tinhorn lawyers and a rain, like corruption, that never ceases. A village, named after a church, filled with the gritty violence of the pioneers, a violence of desperation that overflows in each character, but for the anti-hero role that Warren Beatty has based his career on. If there are brighter days ahead for America’s expansion you will not find it in this movie. Characters resemble pigs in a mud sty. There is no glory or morality anywhere and everyone’s base behavior is sanctioned by a system that still beats today.
The scene occurs between a punk settler and a younger, more innocent man. Of course, everyone was carrying a gun, it is a Western after all, and when the punk repeatedly asked the innocent to show him his fancy-handled weapon and the innocent complied, that was reason enough to shoot him dead in the street, the innocent man having “drawn” on the punk. An entirely acceptable situation since self-defense, despite intense provocation, is somehow a law of nature and the killer will walk free. It all makes sense for some reason. He was looking for an excuse to kill a man legally, in the plain sight of witnesses that would see that this punk was nothing to mess with. You can sense the fear on the screen from the citizens wondering what they have gotten into.
The analogy may not be perfect, but the jolt in my gut feels the same when the news of another fatal shooting of what seems to be the “low hanging fruit” of society — the mentally ill, the poor and the disenfranchised — occurs by law enforcement officers and, by association, the entire criminal justice system, here in the great state of Vermont. A no-knock warrant backed up by a slew of armed law enforcement that ended with a man dead and some pretty terrified neighbors. A knife held by an elderly man. A wanted felon ambushed while following his usual routine. These deaths seem so very avoidable but since accountability is extinct these days, and the numbers back this statement up, it appears to me that these raids serve no other purpose than to send a message. The authorities seemed to purposely place themselves in a semblance of danger in order to fire away, using the fear generated in the local populace as a powerful weapon: “We will come with guns blazing.”
There is never any reference to justice. Investigations take months to reach unsurprising results, while everyone stares into their hands searching for meaning.
If this sounds like terrorism it is only because it fits the definition.
Add the predictable words from the politicians promising an investigation (notice there is always a door behind the lectern as they preach the parsed information to the local news, as if they are ready to flee) and the printing of sordid, out-of-place details by the press and you have a tiny sliver of the huge news cycle that will get lost in itself, vindicating any act. There is never any reference to justice. Investigations take months to reach unsurprising results, while everyone stares into their hands searching for meaning.
I am a concerned citizen and I wonder how the process of organizing these raids occurs and if any countering arguments were allowed between the law enforcement personnel. Most probably not because it appears to be a structure based on strict hierarchy, but who knows? Everything relevant is a secret. Are meetings held one, two or three weeks prior? Perhaps the information supplied by informants caused the authorities to rush out that very day grabbing guns along the way. Can off-duty, out of jurisdiction law enforcement officers be included in apprehending a fugitive in the absence of information and planning? What arguments are used to persuade a judge to sign a no-knock warrant? Is the judge accountable for the results? What exists in the planning stages right now? Who is next on the list?
Since most anyone, the average Joe and Mary, presented with the facts of these operations before they occur (high powered rifles, crowded neighborhoods, a peashooter gun on the premises, a cornered knife-wielding senior citizen, etc.), could predict it would result in violence, most probably fatal, maybe everyday citizens should be included in the decision process from the beginning. We sure cannot trust the judges who easily sign warrants. There are good, fair-minded people available and their silence is only the result of the overbearing power that government is willing to use in an indiscriminate manner. A pre-grand jury so to speak. No one involved in the planning of these raids bothered to remove their jack boots and maybe suggest there was a better way to apprehend two bit criminals, one taking the safety of the public in mind, one involving less costs and more in tune with due process.
We end our system by trusting the judgment of peers; they need to be involved from the beginning. There is a black stain on Vermont for allowing state sanctioned murder.
How do these guys sleep at night, surrounded by so much mud?
