The Arrest of Professor Henry Louis Gates: My Opinion

This situation with Professor Henry Louis Gates sparked a fire in the public eye, and although it's already been a couple days, it's still spreading quickly. From Officer Crowley proclaiming that he will :"never apologize" to President Obama saying that Crowley "stupidly arrested Gates," there are many opinions on what happened. It's easy for people to become offended, especially on racial matters, but I believe that in situations like these, people need to take a step back and think before they state their opinion. I've tried my hardest to stay unbiased as this controversy unfolds. It's hard to determine what happened exactly, due to the two differing recounts of the event - Gates is saying one thing while Crowley is saying another. From what I understand though, both of them were in the wrong in at least one way. I don't feel that I (or anyone else) can confidently place all of the blame on just one of these individuals.

A Short Analysis of the Main Problems that Arose

Problem 1: Crowley asked for identification This is where the racial profiling issue comes in. Many people are saying that Crowley should not have asked for Gates' identification after realizing who he was and that he lived in that house. They're saying that it really wasn't necessary. Gates is a well-known intellectual who is a Harvard professor, has written and edited several books, has participated in the production of several documentaries, and has received many honors and awards. He is extremely well-known not only in the Cambridge community, but all over the country. Crowley should have known who Gates was and left him alone.
(CNN) Commentary: Obama, race, and my arrest

But others are saying that Crowley was just trying to keep Professor Gates safe. Other calls had been placed about disturbances at Gates' home prior to his arrival, so Crowley was just being cautious. For this reason, he felt that he had to go through with the entire process, including asking for Gates' identification (even if he knew who Gates was). For people who look at the situation this way, racial profiling was not part of this incident, but rather it was all about keeping Gates safe.
(CNN) Commentary: Obama's rush to judgment on police

Problem 2: Gates played the 'race card' It has been reported that Gates said some things that were offensive to Crowley, including his inquiry while being questioned, "Why? Because I am a black man in America?" Many people are saying this statement was not necessary. As I already mentioned, it is possible that Crowley had no racial intentions behind his actions, but instead was just concerned for the safety of Gates.

On the other hand, it's obvious that Gates felt he was a victim of racial profiling and was offended. As a result, he proceeded to ask that question without hesitation. Many people don't believe he was wrong for thinking he was a victim of racial profiling or that he was wrong for saying what he said.

A short comment about President Obama's opinion Some articles have questioned whether President Obama, or any presidents for that matter, should make comments on heavy-weighted issues like this. Although I believe that President Obama should have waited until he knew more about the situation to make any comments, I don't believe that any president should purposely avoid commenting when situations like this take place.
Obama wades into a volatile racial issue

Until the police department release the tapes from Gates' arrest, I don't think we're going to have any solid idea about what really happened. With two different versions of the incident and several explanations to justify each person's actions, we won't be getting anywhere in deciding who should carry the blame. As President Obama said, this incident has only proven that "race remains a factor in this society.” It's sad that we as Americans, after so many years, still cannot get over these racial issues.

Feel free to comment and tell me what you think about this incident. Thanks for reading.

Election

Note to self:
Never neglect to use my voice.

On Tuesday and Wednesday of last week, our university held SGA Executive Office elections (President, VP for External Affairs, VP for Academic Affairs, VP for Financial Affairs, VP for Student Affairs, Executive Vice President, Executive Secretary, and the Senators for all colleges). Every year, supporters for each candidate execute serious and extensive campaigns, using every resource possible to spread the word about the person they support: chalking, posters, flyers, customized items (cups, bottle openers, koozies, t-shirts), stickers, banners on fraternity and sorority houses, and more. You get the picture.

The SGA Elections Board watches the campaigns every year to make sure each "party" is following the campaigning guidelines, which are outlined for each and every candidate who is throwing their name in the hat for whichever position they desire. This year, however, unethical campaigning happened far too often. The polls (online this year) closed at midnight on Wednesday, and there was to be no campaigning after 9 pm on that night. Instead of following that guideline, a large number of students continued to campaign, many times unethically. Furthermore, unethical campaigning did not happen only on Wednesday night--it was present throughout the entire campaigning period.

This "unethical campaigning" is only one small part of the election and the influence on voting practices, however. On our campus, a large group of students has created a way to literally control what happens with SGA elections, and even homecoming queen elections. I am not going to discuss explicitly these practices or describe the group of students who are members of this group because the most important thing to understand is this: these students only compose a small percentage of the entire student body, but their influence spans across a majority of the part of the student population that actually participates in the elections. Their influence is so strong that, almost always, their candidate takes the SGA office or the homecoming crown.

Due to the unethical campaigning that has been linked with the group of students mentioned above, many members of the student body have questioned the results of the election that took place last week. This year, over 14,000 students voted, and the winning candidate won by just 261 votes. Many members of the student body have become outraged, disappointed, and frustrated. These students believed that it was finally time for an independent candidate to take the office of SGA president, but once again, that certain group of students who have found a way to control the vote prevailed.

As aforementioned, that certain group of students only composes a small percentage of the student body on this campus. If all of the students had voted in this election, it is very possible that the independent candidate would have actually won. Our campus experiences such voter apathy...

I'm realizing that I can't just be angry with the group of students who strongly influence and control the student vote. I have to be angry with the 7,000 students who did not vote. With those extra 7,000 student votes, I'm sure that the independent candidate (who I supported) would have won indefinitely. We didn't have those votes though, and the other candidate won again.

This is all about a small, college campus SGA election. What difference is this really going to make in the world? None, really.

But for me, I'm realizing how important a person's voice really is. I've always known the importance, especially in relation to national presidential elections, but to have something hit this close to home puts it into perspective even more. I feel that I have a deeper, improved understanding now, whereas before I just accepted the belief without thinking about it any further.

I really wish others would notice the importance of expressing your voice: on campus, and nationally.