Kane Watch: Where is the Anger????

Kane's newest column, a reaction to the murder of Scott Huggins, is more of the same garbage we've come to expect from this race baiter. Kane actually goes so far as to cry racism over the reaction to Scott Huggins's death. While I don't agree with much of what Kane has to say because, as Charlie pointed out, most of us didn't know Huggins was white until later in the process, I've decided to play devil's advocate for this column.

Let's take a look at some of Kane's claims.

For those of us who regularly travel the central city, the possibility of crime and violence is always a daunting reality.

The sad fact that crime and violence is a reality to some people in this city does not make it a reality for others in our overall community. That is why people who don't live in the inner city (or in Gene's terms), white folks, tend to react so strongly to such cases. It's not just an outcry, it's a position that it won't be tolerated. And, it's my opinion that this positioning is what makes the biggest difference between the suburbs and the inner city.

I also realized upon hearing the story that since Huggins was white, it would be a bigger deal than most crime in our city.

I think that Gene believes black people in this city have no valid opinions and can take no action. Why? Because according to this logic, a crime is only a "big deal" if white people react to it. Apparently, the reaction of the mother whose son was recently gunned down, doesn't matter to Kane.

It makes me wonder if the routine police blotter of death in the central city simply never registered until the victim was a white suburbanite.

Clearly Gene has been on vacation. If he had been in town, he may have heard the various talk shows and tv news covering the recent shootings and crime in the city. The race of the victims only comes in to play when Gene is writing an article. So, this point is pretty moot.

It also suggests a troublesome, but understandable, double standard when some become outraged about central city violence only when it happens to someone who looks like them.

Again, Gene has made the assumption that no news media or citizens reacted to any of the other violent acts in the city as of late. This statement is completely idiotic and misinformed.

I don't play the usual game in town that calls for quick response to a white death while a black death just reaffirms the black community's violent dysfunction.

And here, my friends, is the biggest kick of all: It's not that a black death reaffirms the black community's violent dysfunction. Nope. It's Gene's statement before that reaffirms the black community's violent dysfunction: For those of us who regularly travel the central city, the possibility of crime and violence is always a daunting reality.

It is this attitude that enforces that things will never change in the inner city. It's the Eugene Kane's of the world who expect violence and treat it as an everyday occurrence. When a "white folk" is killed at a gas station, other "white folks" react to it because it is not a part of our world view that pumping gas means taking your life into your own hands.

It's because "white folks" believe that 17 year olds should not be feared, and driving down the street should not be more stressful than the traffic, and 11 year old girls should not be gang raped by 20 men in what is, apparently, a common occurrence, that "white folks" are outraged.

Maybe when the residents of the inner city and the voice that represents them show the same kind of outrage, the criminals themselves will have something to fear.

Kane's title says it all: Where's Anger When Victim is Black? Where is the anger, Gene? That column should express that every single life that is lost in the inner city to violence deserves the same kind of reaction from the community members to which those people belonged.

While he should be contrasting the "white" outrage to the "black" complacency, he tries instead to show racism. Turn the mirror on yourself, Gene. You'll see a whole different picture.