Jason Allen's

,

Where Else Can A Man Freak Out?

In Human Rights on July 23, 2009 at 10:15 am

This week,  Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge, Massachusetts Police Department arrested Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. for the crime of being angry inside his own home.  The officer had already completed his investigation of a mistakenly reported burglary, finding that it was just Gates himself dealing with his jammed front door.  But when Professor Gates demanded Crowley’s name and badge number, the officer arrested him for “disorderly conduct.”

This concerns me deeply, not just as an American, but as an American who has spent a lot of money soundproofing my home so that I can say what I want, as loudly as I want, in my own living room (which, as a side note, I’ve remodeled to resemble the Hall of Justice).

Disorderly conduct is only a crime if it’s disruptive to something or someone.  In this case, even if Gates was yelling, he was inside his own home, yelling “Get out of my house!” at a man who clearly should have gotten out of the house!  Unless the neighbor who’d called in the burglary called back to complain about the noise, Gates’ behavior wouldn’t have been disrupting anything except the officer’s illegitimately prolonged visit.

Look, Sargent Crowley, sometimes we all screw up at work.  I once delivered a pizza to 223 Columbus Rd. instead of 322 Columbus Rd!  You harassed an innocent man, then illegally withheld your name and badge number.  These things happen.  Customers get pissed and they yell.  What you never learned, apparently, is that if you let them vent at you, they’re far less likely to complain to your superior, whether that be the assistant manager at Domino’s or President Barack Obama.

Whenever someone defends the police in this case, they say Gates was at fault for “overreacting.”  But since the Professor was arrested, how about defending the officer by naming a crime!!  Overreacting is not a crime.  If it was, we’d have an easier time locking up Nicolas Cage.  Did Professor Gates threaten the officer?  Did he use racial slurs which would make it a hate crime?  Did he confess to a murder?  There’s not much else you can do with only your voice that would warrant arrest inside your own home.  In fact, isn’t your home exactly where you’re supposed to go to do things that would be considered disorderly conduct anywhere else?  Where else can a man freak out?

I’m gonna spend the rest of the day in my house, naked, drunk, and ranting about injustice.  Come and get me, Crowley.

Comment »

,

“Top Ten” Lists Hurt Our Nation

In Threats To Creativity on July 19, 2009 at 3:27 pm

First of all, who decided that “Top Ten” should be the default framework for the American list.  I don’t know that it was David Letterman, but then again, I don’t know that it was not.  Either way, I challenge this person’s authority on the matter.  Secondly, who’s deciding what goes at this ambiguous “Top” anyway?

Third off, why not do a “mid-sixties” list?  A list, for example, of “The Top 63rd Through 68th Rejected Hip-Hop Artist Names,” offering exposure to all-too-overlooked entries like #64: “Cuppa-T,” or #66: “Lil’ P.P.”  Not top ten material, but dare we deem them unworthy?

My fourth point is that people are too willing to stick to convention with no other reason than “that’s the way it’s done.”  If our founding fathers had thought this way, they’d have created a tyrannical empire!

Fifthly, we can see the effects of this creative void in our nation’s children: My recent analysis of thousands of kindergartners’ drawings reveal them to be derivative, foolishly simplistic, and lacking emotional depth.

Sixth of all, it’s high time we switched over to lettered lists (as in, “The A to Z of Edible Furniture”) like they do in Europe.

Seventhly, attention spans are shrinking.  We need to either adjust to the times and shorten our lists, or better yet, challenge ourselves with lists reaching into the hundreds.  The next time someone presents you with a Top Ten List, demand to see numbers eleven through twenty.  You have a right to know.  I wager you’ll be met with a shameful confession–ten is all they had.

My eighth concern is the message we send to other countries who are poised to take over the traditionally American list industry.  We’re basically saying we can only work within one through ten.  The country that comes out with a viable “Bottom Twenty-Seven List” will own the 21st century.

Ninth of all is the predictability factor.  We’ve trained our minds to expect the same one-to-ten rhythm and cadence from every list.  What would happen if suddenly we didn’t know when a list might just end without notice?  I say we’d finally start living, that’s what.

Comment »

,

Emergency Social Networking: A Cross Between Facebook And Dialing 911

In Apologies on July 11, 2009 at 7:00 pm

I would like to apologize for the long gap in posting to this blog.  I would also like to apologize to everyone who attempted to seek emergency assistance via my now-failed internet business, www.PleaseHelpMyEmergencyRightNow.com.

It turns out that signing up for a social networking account is the last thing a person wants to do when they’ve been injured or have just witnessed a horrible incident.  I guess I imagined people would sign up while everything was okay, or maybe just as things were starting to look a little dangerous, but I see now how unrealistic that was.  Also, the unpredictable nature of emergency situations would have required that I monitor the site 24/7 in order to help when help was most needed, rather than “within 1-72 hours” as was our ill-conceived policy.

I know it doesn’t catch your car-jacker (NickStranded) or sew your hand back on (bleeder27), but all I can offer is my sincere apology and my promise that I’m leaving the emergency assistance business for good.  I intend to focus my work here on this blog, and spend only small amounts of time building my new site, www.OnlineBabyDelivery.com.

Comment »