Listen to this woman's words carefully.
Michele Linton-Delashment is a mother who lost her child to the deadly streets of Chicago. I chose to edit the original clip of the entire group interview down to a specific focus upon her words and feelings.
My goal is not to disrespect this woman not diminish her loss. I agree that no one had the right to gun down her child and steal her child's potential as the blood flowed upon the streets. At the same time I became far too unsettled with this woman's line of thinking that I was forced to apply additional inspection of the wide cavern between the events that motivated her to FEEL that the Earth's axis had shifted on November 4, 2008 and how the Pirates on the streets failed to get the memo.
Upon seeing such a gap - the way my brain works - I would be motivated to go back and ask myself some fundamental questions about my body of assumptions.
For this woman - The failure of her local community, the culture that it collectively indoctrinated their children into, and the resultant lack of value for human life has motivated her to look past the favorable local government that she has supported to manage her affairs and instead call upon the distant FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
I don't believe that this woman has any notion on the limits of POWER expressed by the Federal Government.
I am made to fear what this woman would YIELD in the way of her freedoms in pursuit of SAFETY.
If the PATRIOT ACT was an overstep in pursuit of safety then the way that this woman thinks is a full return to functional slavery.
Tommie Bosley: "The President of the United States is from here. He knows. He's from Hyde Park. He knows what is going on here and its time for him to address this as a major issue.Barack Obama - who is from this same community is now president. He now has the voice to say "NO MORE, STOP IT" and all of the forces that are terrorizing and killing the community members will fall in line.
M.L.D.: Its a combination of all of the above. Everyone is going to have to band together.
CNN: Do you agree with what he says? Is this a national issue now?
M.L.D.: Oh my God yes. He needs to say "NO MORE. No More. Let's stop it.".
Let's talk about presidential powers and when the Black community called upon them for protection. I am forced to think about President Eisenhour. Our people were being terrorized by the threat that faced us if we dared to enter into schools that were previously designated as all White. The year was 1957 and the federal troops were called in to enforce the will of the courts.
The antagonists were OUTSIDE of our community. They used violence and terrorism as a means of having their way in suppression of our rights under the law.
Today there is a favorable political arrangement in place and the key forces that are terrorizing the community are from the inside of the community. Despite this fact the call is placed to the President of the United States to address this threat that ulimately steems from within. This does not make rationale sense to me. It is the sign of a broken people who are following an unrealistic set of assumptions per the investments that they have made to arrive at this point. The critical question must be asked: "Were they, in fact, working in their own best interests as expressed on the streets? OR were they working in the interests of those forces that now are in the seats of power, just as the prescription called for?"
Cynthia Waters: HOW is the question? I mean realistically. Because I'm still kinda synical. I don't think that we'll live in a 'Oh I love you, Put the guns down' type of world" We just won't
M.L.D.: But weren't we just like that the day he became president? Didn't we band together and come to Grant Park and it didn't matter if you pushed me or stepped on my foot or touched me. I had no fear of the city because WE FINALLY GOT AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN PRESIDENT. We were a million strong in Grant Park. So how come we can't be a million strong....................................................................................FOR GUN CONTROL?.
OK. Where do I start?
I know where. Let me restate where I stand with reference to Barack Obama. I did not vote for Barack Obama BECAUSE OF PEOPLE JUST LIKE THIS WOMAN. Worse than his policies, from my perspective, are the people just like this woman who'd believe that by yielding everything about herself in order to put in the POLICIES THAT BARACK OBAMA saw fit - me and America would get rolled over IF this was necessary for her to be in compliance. (I voted "None Of The Above" for the position of President)
Let's inspect this woman's LINE OF REASONING.
Is there CORRELATION at play in her statements?
I had no fear of my city - BECAUSE........a Black man was elected president?
Think about it.
We had 43 other presidents in this nation's history. If at another time someone said "We had a Catholic President now and thus I don't feel scared walking down dark alleys in the night" back when JFK was elected - would you see this woman as a rational person?
Has either subject established enough of a correlation between HER PUBLIC SAFETY and the mere election of the president?
OR - as it appears was the lady in the video caught up in her EMOTIONS about that which was transpiring in front of her?
Upon establishing this point - would YOU be comfortable in allowing this person to have more control over your life with the type of policies that might make her FEEL safe along with the person who would implment them per her demands?
INSIDE THE BLACK COMMUNITY / OUTSIDE OF THE BLACK COMMUNITY
Let's pretend that we got past the irrational thougths in the middle portion of the segment. I struggle to understand how - out of all of the forces at play in her community she chose the force of the GUNS as the main threat? She demands GUN CONTROL via the federal government to bring her some "real safety" that her imagined bit of security felt at Grant Park did not endure once reality set back in.
This previous feeling of serinity was obtained by her taking the train down to the park and standing within a crowd that was radiating energy as such.
Her second pass involves having the government to sweep into her city and control the GUNS.
They all say that this is a national problem.
They don't mention that nearby Naperville does not have a problem with deadly gun violence.
Since this woman is no respecter of cause and effect it would be logical for her to travel to Naperville and document the RELEVANT variables that allow them to be far less plagued with violence than is the plot of land that is but a short drive away. Certainly it is not the differences in elevation between these two places.
This would be a worthy exercise for this woman and others like her to take before agreeing to yield so much to the government in the name of safety.
View Larger Map