By John W. Lillpop
Lovelle Mixon was an ex-con who was in violation of his parole and whom was also suspected of raping a 12-year-old girl who was dragged off the street at gun point in the Oakland neighborhood where Mixon's sister lived.
Four murders were added to Mixon's "rap sheet" on Saturday last when the 26-year-old black man shot and killed four members of the Oakland, California Police Department. The killer was (thankfully) slain by police that same dreary afternoon.
Reactions to the Mixon slaughter in some parts of the Bay Area were all too predictable.
For example, calls for new, more restrictive gun control laws were immediate.
The fact that laws already on the books forbid ex-felons like Mixon from buying weapons of any sort must have been overlooked by politicians and other public servants bent on repealing the second amendment.
Mixon's family tried to "explain" the killer's action by pointing out that he was very anxious about going back to prison, and was unhappy with his parole officer.
Being anxious about another term in prison is understandable, especially if one has, in fact, violated parole and raped a 12-year old since being released. Likewise, unhappiness over one's parole officer can cause sleepless nights, diarrhea, and a host of discomforts,
However, killing four police officers is not an acceptable response to anxiety, sleepless nights, or diarrhea, regardless of how pernicious.
From the March 25 edition of the San Francisco Chronicle, a letter writer offered, in part, this "solution":
"Until we dedicate more resources to education and decent employment for the poor, these young men will continue to turn to guns, drugs and violence. Dehumanizing them makes it easy for us to write them off."
So, society is at fault for failing to provide "education and decent employment" for the likes of Lovelle Mixon?
We, not he, are responsible for the ghastly slaughter of four on-duty police officers?
In a more literate treatment, Earl Ofari Hutchinson, author and political analyst, wrote a lengthy column (reference 1) in which he cited discrimination against ex-convicts as a major cause of murderous rampages like the one by Lovelle Mixon last Saturday.
According to Hutchinson, businesses that refuse to hire ex-felons are veritable incubators for the likes of Mixon. Hutchinson also believes that passage of the "Second Chance Act" by Congress could solve many of the problems faced by ex-felons.
Which begs the obvious question: Whither the bailout for ex-felons?
With dedicated Marxists running the federal government, why is there no urgent drive to plop down a trillion dollars (two trillion would be even better!) of taxpayer treasury to bail out ex-felons?
To avoid the stigma of looking soft on crime, why not use a euphemism to describe this bail out?
How about "reparations"?