Uh, I don’t know. Maybe because they think its unfair that ol’ boy go off with the sentence that he did? Do you think justice occurred in this case? Even if you do, why shouldn’t the PA Black Caucus speak on behalf of their constituents and say that something is wrong with the system? The communities being to refered to are the same communities that got them elected. No reading between the lines is necessary to understand that. Politicians are always jabbering about their communities.
Oh I get it, just because they’re called the Black Caucus, they should just to sit back and wait for some other group of concerned citizens to speak up about this perceived injustice, 'cause otherwise people will think this a “black thing” and ignore it because the of the so-called race card (which happens to be imagined in this case, but okay). I understand where you’re coming from now. How dare the Caucus act like other political bodies! How dare they!
shaking fist…but not raising it because I don’t want to be accused of expressing Black Power
I concede that there may be more to the story than we were given by the OP, but if he’s going to make an accusation of “playing the race card,” it behooves him to support it with some evidence. And, as i said, there’s not a shred of evidence in either of his links to support his assertion.
Bolding mine.
Personally, i believe that anyone who kills someone in a car accident, and who leaves the scene and actively attempts to cover his trail in the way Druce did, should be treated as a violent, not a non-violent offender.
A car accident is a car accident, and is not a crime of violence. But i think that attempts to evade the consequences of such accidents should raise the level of seriousness considerably, because the attitude demonstrates a selfishness and callousness that i normally associate with violent crime.
YMMV
And i’m on record (multiple times) on these message boards arguing that there should be stiffer penalites for stuff like this.
I agree that playing the race card when it’s not germaine to the point should stop. However, playing the race card when it’s relevent is permissible.
Druce’s ethnicity, social status and knowledge to exploit the system are all pretty germaine to the point: that any non-white legislator in Druce’s predicament in that region under those circumstances very likely wouldn’t have benefitted the way Druce did. The race card isn’t just about race, it’s about glas ceilings, boy’s clubs and country club discrimination and access to power, too.
There’s actually more to the story than the links would indicate.
Druce went out one day and hit a pedestrian who was crossing the street, killing him. The pedestrian, who had been drinking, was a black ex-Marine named Kenneth Cains. After the accident, Druce left the scene, had his car fixed, traded it in, and told everyone he thought he’d hit a sign on the Turnpike, including the police and his insurance company. The police got an anonymous tip connecting Druce to Cains’s death. When confronted with this evidence, Druce pleaded guilty to hit and run, insurance fraud, and tampering with evidence.
Here’s what’s got everyone’s panties in a twist. He appealed his case, calling the sentence “unfair” and was freed on bail. During the appeals process, his lawyer tried to get him special consideration, including time served or (IIRC) house arrest, and Druce spent time whining about how rough he had it.
So the perception is that he’s not really taking any responsibility for his crime. He didn’t enter prison until May of 2004, although he spent 40 months on ankle monitoring while he was out on bail. While he was out on bail (while he was being monitored), he made numerous trips out of the area, including vacations to the Jersey Shore. So prison was really the only punishment Druce got since he was paid as a consultant after he left the legislature and wasn’t subject to any kind of real restrictions while he was out on bail and subject to monitoring.
IMNSHO, the man deserves a pitting for being an asshat, but the Black Caucus is well within its rights to bitch about the favorable treatment he got relative to his victim.
Thanks to Airman Doors for the link to the column. That John Baer, he’s quite a card, isn’t he? It takes some serious brass to trot out the statistic that whites (who comprise 85% of Pennsylvania’s population) make up only 37% of its state prison inmates, and use that to argue that the PA justice system is color blind. Other than that, all the racial rhetoric is Baer’s, not that of anyone in the PLBC. The columnist sees it as a racial issue, and then makes the error of assuming that the PLBC must as well. Of course, by doing his best to persuade his readers that hit-and-run penalties are a racially polarizing issue, Baer is doing what he’s carelessly accusing others of doing.
There’s a subtler issue here. The PLBC initiative is an extremely small thing: to increase the length of DL suspensions imposed for hit-and-run. That’s it, so far as I can tell: there’s nothing here about probation conditions or sentencing guidelines or anything else. So the question is, even if someone suspected the PLBC of “playing the race card” (and if anyone wants to define that differently than I did earlier, go ahead) why would they take the trouble and risk the opprobrium of starting that argument?
They’re seriously opposed to increasing DL suspensions for hit-and-run. So far as I can tell, this isn’t the case. Anybody worried about the PLBC stirring up racial tension over this issue can deal with it by supporting the initiative. They can’t demonize their opponents if they don’t have any, and there’s nothing about this proposal to oppose.
Race really is the issue after all. The accusation is being made over a trivial issue not because anyone wants to change the outcome, but because they want to change the process. They don’t want the PLBC discussing matters that might even peripherally pertain to race, no matter how clean the PLBC plays it (and there’s still no indication they’re doing anything wrong). Why? Well, there’s no doubt that bringing racism into a political discussion is a powerful and often uncontrollable tactic, one that can cause a lot of unintended damage to both sides. I’d bet that the members of the PLBC know this too, even better than you and I and the redoubtable Mr. Baer. That may be why I’ve still seen no irresponsible rhetoric from them, at least not on a par with what I’ve seen elsewhere. Why act so strenuously to point to and decry this tactic over such a trivial matter, when it could simply be defused by joining the PLBC this time? I suspect that it could be part of a strategy to prevent racism from being part of any future discussions, appropriate or not. Why is this a good thing? You’d have to ask the pointers and decriers.
Oh yawn. Anyone else amused by how often these threads follow the same pattern?
Hey, kids! Create your own danceswithcats Pit Thread ™!
Here’s how it works.
STEP 1: Create a post with the following template:
“Look!!! Here’s a semi-minor news event that I just _______ (#1)! OMG this totally proves that the ________ (#2) are being ________ (#3) yet again by the ________(#4)!!! Horror! Consternation! Spittle!”
STEP 2: Substitute the blank spots with your choice of the following:
#1: read online / saw or heard on RushHannityHardballOReillyCoulter/ was forwarded in a mass email by people I barely know
#2: Bush administration / rich folks / white folks / Republicans / gun owners / corporations / Christians / name-the-non-oppressed-group-of-your-choice
#4: Liberal media / Liberals / United Nations / French / majority of dopers / blacks / immigrants / abortionistas / Jews / Iraqis / atheists / Muslims / Liberal Muslims / Liberal Muslim Immigrants / trial attorneys / Liberal Muslim Immigrant trial attorneys who write for the mainstream media
STEP 3: Look over your post. Make sure you haven’t added anything to back up your claims or check the sources, other than one or at most two links. Remember: who has time to add details or research when there are still knees left unjerked?
STEP 4: Watch the fun from the sidelines as your claims are thoroughly debunked! Don’t step back into the thread for a while. It’s much more enjoyable to let others do your work for you.
STEP 5: If you’re feeling up to it, once the thread has settled down and everyone’s shown your original thesis to be bullshit, sneak in with a little “oh, maybe you’re right, but it SO TOTALLY COULD’VE been true!”
STEP 6: Repeat every two weeks, or perhaps every two days if an election is going on. Never, and I mean never, learn from the 1932648326564 other times you’ve followed the same exact pattern only to have everyone prove your premise faulty.
Enjoy!
All that said, I do love danceswithcats’ screenname.
That could be, but I don’t see evidence thereof in the newspaper. IMHO, if the gentleman Tom Druce struck had been white, the Black Caucus wouldn’t have registered a peep, nor would they if a well connected black man had struck a pedestrian of either color. To accept your question as positive, they would have to come out against the offense, period, and so do in a consistent manner, which simply isn’t in the newspaper which I read, or the radio station to which I listen.
Yes, I do, and when their activities are free from racial impetus, I’ll not decry their actions.
In response to you with the face: This isn’t about race as much as it is about power and access to it. If I had been driving down Cameron Street DUI and struck that man, my ass would still be in jail. As stated above, I believe that a black man with money-one with connections and influence such as those in the legislation are privy to would have been treated much the same as Tom Druce has.
Thank you for that link, Airman Doors. I had not read it at the time of my OP.
So, to summarize, the race card wasn’t actually played. They just did something that you speculate they might not have done had the circumstances been different.
Who knows? Maybe it was a card trick, and they’ve hidden the race card in the same place you’ve hidden your evidence.
Because there’s certainly no evidence for your assertion in any of the material you provided, and it’s still a considerable stretch based on the article provided by Airman Doors.
Unfortunately, you see their very involvement as necessarily entailing “racial impetus”, so this is never likely to happen, is it?
Funny, that’s what they said; that it’s about a rich person getting away with killing a poor one. And yet they’re using a “racial impetus”, while you’re not. How odd. Also, I don’t remember you conducting a campaign against disparities in hit and run sentencing. It only seems to come up when there’s black people fulminating against it. Does this make you a meta-race-card player?
Oh good, and here’s Argent Towers to inform us that the Black Caucus’s mere existence serves to prove their nefarious intent. Hey, Argent; what’s the problem with this “incident” again? Do you think Druce should be getting away so lightly?
“…State Rep. Thaddeus Kirkland (D., Delaware), chairman of the legislative black caucus, said the parole was an example of a privileged person being “slapped on the wrist” for crimes that might have kept a poor person incarcerated longer.
“Poor folk end up in jail, sometimes for the rest of their life, for such a crime,” Kirkland said…”
and
“…Democratic legislative leaders, who from the start have voiced moral outrage at Druce’s conduct, kept up the pace Friday.
Rep. Bill DeWeese, Democratic floor leader in the House, called the parole an outrage.
“If the down-and-out U.S. Marine had run helter-skelter over an Oxford-cloth, striped-tie, preppy legislator, that poor old salt would have been in the slammer until the cows came home,” DeWeese said.
Republican leaders, while condemning Druce’s actions, have been mostly quiet on the topic.”
(See Post 10)
Yes, let’s take a better look at that link.
An op-ed piece, is not a cite!
But, lets examine it anyway,
But, see the charge of vehicular homicide was dropped.
That (the homicide) is the only part of this that could be an accident.
Did Druce accidentally commit insurance fraud?
Did Druce accidentally tamper with evidence?
Did Druce accidentally leave the scene of a fatal accident?
Cains’ death, Druce’s career, yeah, those are two things of equivalent value.
“Cains is lucky, he’s dead, I got to find a new job!”
No, (I quote my post #10)“Druce voted in favor of a bill that mandated a minimum prison term of one year for leaving the scene of a fatal accident. That bill became law in 1996. Under state law, a maximum prison term must be at least double the minimum and any maximum sentence of two years or more is a state prison sentence” this was not a hit-and-run (three to 12 months) this was a hit-and-run; leaving the scene of a fatal accident (one year minimum, in state prison).
Very convenient to only give the minimum guidelines for the crimes Druce committed.
Hit-and-run; leaving the scene of a fatal accident, 2 years max
Insurance fraud, ? max
Tampering with evidence, ? max
Yeah, Druce got more than the minimums, and he deserved it!
John Baer is full of shit!
Great cite, wish they were all this good!
CMC fnord!
Are there other groups that are calling attention to this foulness? Is the Black Caucus piggy-backing on a horse that’s been beaten to death, or is it–in a noble fashion–trying to get folks to see an injustice, thereby affecting policy in a constructive way?
If there are a number of other groups and individuals that are protesting and calling for action on this–and the Black Caucus is merely trying to wedge itself ahead of all of these groups by making this a race issue, then they don’t deserve a lot of praise. But I don’t see this happening at all. It seems to me if it weren’t for the Black Caucus, a lot of people wouldn’t even know about this incident or those like it (I know I wouldn’t). A lot of us would be clueless about how our justice system really works. They should be applauded for taking a stand, period.
You think the PLBC is taking a stand because they see this as a race issue. Maybe they’re taking a stand because they realize most politicians are too scared to do anything that doesn’t benefit them or their constituents directly. They know if they wait for the less controversial, paler-skinned people to say something, they will be waiting forever. And maybe the PLBC does see this as a race issue as well as a class issue. Maybe the PLBC thinks that if the former legislator had been a black guy of equal economic standing, you’d be seeing a lot more uproar about him being released so soon. But since the PLBC has never made this is a race issue, I think it’s safe to say that they are not playing a race card.
You’re attributing ulterior motives to the real heros in this issue. Why are you slamming the Black Caucus when the real villian is the guy who has tried to weasle out of his well-deserved punishment? How about pitting him? And how about pitting the people who think having a “few shekels in your pocket” should make you unaccountable to your crimes? How about pitting those Pennsylvania legislators who haven’t said boo about this? Why are the Republican legislators so quiet? Do you think those folks are more virtuous, more admirable than the “rabble-rousers” who aren’t afraid to call a duck a duck? Do Republicans think rich folks–oops, I mean “the well-connected”–deserve lighter sentences than poor folks? They may not be, but they sure as hell aren’t working very hard to change this perception.
The ironic thing is that the OP recognizes that this has happened because the victim doesn’t have the political clout and influence that the guy who ran him over did. But how does one who is like the victim attain any political currency? Clearly, it’s not going to just be handed to them; they have to make their voices heard and work through the system, right? “In our communities we’re hearing outrage”. Seems to me that the outrage of the people has been communicated to the state congress via the Black Caucus, which is the right place to channel such feelings. It is only through that process that most non-rich people can acquire power.
So why is the OP complaining? The Caucus is trying to right a wrong that even he acknowledges exists. If it weren’t for them, its highly probable that no one in a position of power would be trying to correct the system, and the status quo would continue to go along unchallenged. And yet he finds fault with themrather than those who do nothing except talk about the disparities without doing anything about them.
you with the face, the PLBC is only protesting this because the victim is BLACK. If he were WHITE, the PLBC wouldn’t be saying shit. Thus, they are racists. Why can’t you see that?
What’s really ironic is that this is the very definition of the “race card”: attributing racist motives to harmless–perhaps even noble–actions based on wild speculation and prejudice.
