Response to Misintepretation of 220 Rallies in Clara Wang’s Opinions on USA TODAY

Clara Wang’s USA TODAY Article
Clara-


As one of the organizers of the Peter Liang rally in Philadelphia, I have to say I strongly disagree with your overall opinions on those rallies in 43 cities across the nation. As a Chinese American, I hate to tell you I am disappointed that you, a top university educated Asian descendent, unfortunately misconstrued the rallies and our pledges. Furthermore, your article is spreading the wrong messages and bringing more misinterpretation to the general public. I ask you to stop, listen to me, and think again for yourself.

You wrote “both black and white activists misconstrue Asian activists as protesting Liang’s conviction. What they are really protesting is the fact that so many white cops before Liang got away with the same crime scot-free.” You may believe you have possessed the insider’s viewpoints on these protests as an Asian descendent. Unfortunately I have to tell you, you can’t be more wrong! The black and white activists are correct. We are protesting Liang’s conviction. We are protesting the NYPD’s bureaucracy which has created two victims, Gurley and Liang. We intend to stop this bureaucracy further victimizing Liang by over-penalizing him with a conviction disproportional to his misconduct. Based on your article I had to guess you really knew little about the depths and magnitude of these rallies and our pledges. Please spare yourself five minutes to watch some YouTube videos on those rallies. I doubt you would find substances to support your claims. Could you possibly have misjudged your fellow Asian protesters?

You stated people went on protests “wasn’t because the verdict was unjust. They were angry because so many white police officers involved in fatal shootings before him were let off. Liang,” Again, you are wrong! We are protesting because the conviction was unjust! We don’t believe Liang’s conviction of 2nd degree manslaughter fits the facts of a misfired bullet bouncing off a wall and accidentally hitting Mr. Gurley in the dark. More evidences have surfaced with regards to the accidental and tragic nature of Mr Gurley ‘s death, and the political undercurrent of the subsequent conviction. Those new findings have cast serious doubt on various aspects of this conviction including mishandled court hearings. Questions for you, in your idealist mindset, have you ever wondered why a then 26-year old, only several years senior of you, who may not be as privileged to enter a top university, got convicted for reckless 2nd degree manslaughter from a gun accident in NYC, where NO police officers have been convicted in line-of-duty shooting deaths for over a decade? Have you ever wondered why the NY Police Union did not spare him a top attorney, as the Union had previously done in similar incidents, as many other police unions in the country may have done? Have you ever wondered what life and death really meant to two rookie cops while patrolling at night in NYC house projects which at times can be war-zone like, and near where two police officers were killed in execution style in 2014? Have you ever wondered why NYPD had two rookie officers without adequate training patrolling in those highly dangerous areas? Aren’t you suspiciouu?  Had you thought through those facts, I doubt you would have stated “Liang is facing up to 15 years in prison, and rightfully so…for a police officer in a tense situation — especially in New York City — there is no room for panic”.

I trust you would do more research on this tragedy, rethink your opinions, and take corrective actions. If you need info, please contact me at fishswimsallday@gmail.com. I appreciate you have properly acknowledged a few good things of those protests such as breaking away from being the silent minority. Thank you.

《Response to Misintepretation of 220 Rallies in Clara Wang’s Opinions on USA TODAY》上的2个想法

  1. Clara, thanks for writing this piece, and for expressing your opinion and breaking the stereotype as an Asian American. I agree with some things you said but disagree with others. Since you said that we are starting a conversation, please hear me out.

    Gurley was hit by Liang’s bullet and died, that does not make it manslaughter, much less reckless manslaughter. If no wrongdoing led to a man being killed, the technical legal term is “accidental killing”, which is not a crime. You mentioned the word “negligence” in your article, well, negligent manslaughter would have been a much lighter conviction than what Peter Liang got, which was reckless manslaughter. Yes, the 220 rallies were indeed protesting the unfairness in the conviction.

    The 220 protests formally declared to the media that, by objecting to the conviction of Peter Liang, no judgements are being made about the earlier shooting cases and police involved deaths. So please correct what you say in this regard. Certainly, it is my personal belief that some of those past cases involved police brutality and the officer involved was let off too easily. But policing is dangerous work, especially in the war zone that is New York’s public housing. There is good reason that it takes a lot to indict and convict an officer, especially a junior officer. Again, I am not making any concrete judgements about any particular case. But given this background, I believe that statements such as “Liang is facing up to 15 years of prison and rightfully so” may need to be more measured.

    The rallies may, as you say, not be asking for the acquittal of Liang. But they are indeed protesting the unfairness in the case. There is a middle zone, the devil is in the details, and these details matter to Peter Liang and the public conscience.

  2. Good morning!
    Please let me comment this by my draft of speech for the 2/20 Free Officer Peter Liang Rallies. Thank you, David Dao Yin

    The Fight for Putting People Together
    –in response to Two American’s Tragedy, Justice and Beyond
    Free Officer Peter Liang (Rally)
    02/20/2016
    Dao Yin, a Local Activist on Demand
    facebook: Dao Yin (尹导)
    1.      We are fighting for America’s Justice, for Putting American People back Together, NOT for Dividing People even Further! While everyone can have her/his own opinions on this unrecoverable tragedy, all of us agreed that any Injustice is further Dividing American People!
     
    2.      Again, our thoughts and prayers are with the victim and his family. Mr. Akai Gurley, an innocent American who was killed in an accident which involved Officer Peter Liang, the other American who was on the Most Dangerous Duty as one of the New York’s Finest.
     
     
    3.      We have already had an unrecoverable tragedy happened to Mr. Akai Gurley’s family. We don’t want another unrecoverable tragedy happen to Officer Peter Liang’s family because of this obvious Injustice.
    A two time Injustice cannot bring a Justice. Revenge never results in Peace.
     
    4.     People are not always born Equal. But if you step on USA, you become Equal because We are Equal. This is this country stands for!
     
    5.      What I would like to say something Beyond here is that two American people in this saddest tragedy are pure Americans. At least during my speech, let’s stop calling them one African American and the other Chinese American. Why? Because this long year Racial Category/Race Grouping has been OVERLY USED in this country and this society to further divide American People.
    FACTS: The federal government’s classification of race and ethnicity was white, black or African-American, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. Why did we settle on these particular groupings for so many years?
    (African-Americans became eligible for citizenship in 1868, Native Americans in 1924, and Asian-Americans in 1954.)
    In earlier times, minority groups had fought against separate racial classification on the census. Despite these complaints, the categories have changed very little in 35 years. The only major adjustment came in 1997, when OMB permitted respondents to choose more than one race, changed “Black” to “Black or African American,” and moved Pacific Islanders from the Asian category to a new one that also included native Hawaiians.
    I have a dream. One day American people will Not be seeing each other’s skin color as Sensitive as we are Now, because we will see all our skin color as the Color of Water. (“The Color of Water: A Black Man’s Tribute to his White Mother”, New York Times Best Seller. That was the first book my English teacher assigned us to read 17 years ago, when I stepped on the United States of America.)
    (The same English teacher assigned us the first English writing about Stereotype.  Therefore I have been thinking about America’s racial problems for 17 years and I published this online recently.)     
     (DY @ Michigan)

发表回复

您的电子邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注