Ferguson

I have not put much effort into following the Ferguson, MO, crisis.  For anyone remotely connected to U.S. news, though, it jumps in your face.

And it should.  As far as I can tell, the majority of the main actors in this farce (that would be funny were it not real) have behaved poorly. 

1. Michael Brown, the "unarmed black man" (as he is unwaveringly described), appears to have been robbing a store shortly before the event.
2. Darren Wilson somehow found himself in a situation where he shot an "unarmed black man" six times, killing him.  This may or may not have been in complete self defense, and it may or may not eventually reveal poor decision making, poor training, or poor execution of protocol.  Having known cops that killed in the line of duty, I suspect (were the whole world not watching) that he would be the first to say that something went wrong here.
3. The rioters who have destroyed property and assaulted civilians and police alike.
4. The protestors who did not turn on the rioters.
5. The various level of police who have acted like this was a war zone, bringing to bear military-grade weaponry without any of the various sorts of training necessary to use it effectively and safely, including (a)the insensitivity and animosity, such as the one who now infamously said "Bring it, you f*ing animals"; (b) the violence against anyone around, including journalists that have caught it on film; and (c) the complete tone deafness shown by circling wagons and protecting the name and image of the police officer while obviously disparaging that of the "unarmed black man."
6. The governor of Missouri, who thought curfews and a show of force were the best responses to an area rioting explicitly because many distrust the government and shows of force.
7. Much of the media, especially those that have drawn many conclusions with unwarranted certainty.

Don't get me wrong, though.  There is much to protest here.  It has just been done poorly.

• The police should not need military-grade weaponry, and if they do have it, they should at least be trained on escalation procedures and how to safely and effectively use it.
• Restrictions on speech should virtually never be employed, and even rarer should we use curfews.  These tools tend to hurt those that want to stay in the system while leaving those that do not with more power.
• This is a racially charged situation, and acting like it is not, or that race is not relevant, is silly.  But that should not give a blank check to every racist out there -- on both sides of this particular race question -- granting free reign to spew their thinly veiled (if veiled at all) racist comments... at least not without counter speech.
• And, by the way, this is not a "mainstream media" problem; it's an "all the media" problem.  IMO, by far the worst offenders, from what I can tell, have been the shock jocks, etc.
• Any elected official involved should lose his job.  Certainly the policeman who uttered the "animals" comment should.  (No, I don't care that he was acting in the heat of the moment.)

Solving the rioting problem is relatively easy.  Allow people to exercise their rights of speech, assembly, and petition.  Arrest those that break the law, but do so carefully and with respect, even when respect is not given.  Work with civic organizations to help draw down the anger.  Work with journalists, giving them other news stories than riots and abuse.  In other words, behave like adults.

Oh, and ... investigate the shooting, using an outside group.  Make announcements on the timing of the investigation, but otherwise treat it as other investigations.  Act fairly on the findings.  Let our open system function.

But you will still have a racial problem in Ferguson.  It's not a black problem or a white problem (or an Asian or Hispanic or ...).  It's a problem of race relations, of a status quo that continues to create power problems and issues of group-think expectations that, unfortunately, often turn into self-fulfilling prophecies.  If you treat a white guy like he's a racist bum who would never hire a black guy, he may start to resent black guys; if you treat a black guy like he is more likely to commit a crime, he might become that way.

Before I close, a few pet peeves:

1. No, the problem is not "their culture."  Though this doesn't sound like it has to be racist ... who is the antecedent for "their"?  If your first thought was "well, those black people," then yes, this is a racist statement.
2. No, the video of the robbery is not completely irrelevant, so saying so is silly.  But -- and this is more important, I think -- the video is not THAT relevant.  How many people each day belligerently rob people?  I'm guessing hundreds.  How many then rush a cop?  Many bullies back down to larger shows of force.  So, while the video may show Michael Brown's state of mind at some previous point, no, it does not come close to answering whether he rushed Darren Wilson.  It certainly would be very difficult to admit it into evidence to show that (though likely it could for other reasons).
3. No, the journalists are not doing anything immoral by ignoring the arbitrary rules the governor placed on them.  They might be breaking a valid law, but maybe not... the constitutional questions would be worth debating. Either way, this is what journalists are supposed to do.
4. No, the police are not all bad, racist, power hungry jerks that scream racist remarks and slam journalists heads into walls.
5. But, no, police are not all good guys.  Some are bad, racist, power hungry jerks that scream racist remarks and slam journalists heads into walls.
6. No, it is not stupid for a black man to expect to be treated poorly by a white cop.  I know lots of white cops that would not do so, but anybody that thinks otherwise has had very few conversations with either cops or black guys.

Race is still a big problem in our country.  So is unchecked police power.  Situations get particularly bad when you mix both.  I hope we keep working to make it better.

Thoughts?