By Angelo Falcone
Many of the men in blue say they would remain seated during the National Anthem. Like a small but growing number of professional athletes refusing to stand for the national anthem, mainliners have expressed similar views of the criminal justice system.
“Asked on the Line” conducted an informal survey with four questions. The first question mainliners were asked was, would you stand for the National Anthem or would you remain seated like San Francisco Forty-Niner football player Colin Kaepernick?
The second question mainliners were asked was whether they agree with the notion that compared to other countries, the United States has the best criminal justice system in the world, albeit not a perfect system.
Third, the men in blue were asked, if resources were not an issue, would you ever leave the United States and live in another country?
Finally, the men in blue were asked, should the government be judged because individual government employees, agents, and/or officers abuse their authority or because the government fails to hold those corrupt employees, agents and/or officers responsible?
Of the men surveyed, 52 percent would stand for the national anthem, but 48 percent would remain seated.
Fifty-five percent of the men surveyed did not agree that the U.S. has the “best” criminal justice system in the world. However, 30 percent agreed that, compared to other countries, the U.S. justice system is indeed the best. Fifteen percent replied they did not know.
When asked if they would ever leave the U.S. and live in another country, 44 percent replied “maybe” and 11 percent “not likely.” However, 11 percent answered they would live in another country “someday” and 19 percent would leave the U.S. as soon as they get off parole. Fifteen percent of the men surveyed vowed to never leave the country.
Although the survey was anonymous, some of the men chose to voice their opinions.
A. Ross: “I have a right to a trial, and if I am sentenced to death, I have a right to appeal. The police are setting those rights aside.”
L. Paul: “I would find out what the officers are going through, and then I would forgive them and pray for them.”
W. Goodman: “I would not judge the system, rather those who abuse their authority, and I would expect the system to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.”
F. Jones: “Both. When an employee of the government fails to abide by the laws, they should be held accountable for that violation. The government should be judged if they do not hold those employees accountable.”
D. Krizman: “The behavior of government officials must be honorable for any system of government to work. Our system should be simplified and refined, and its officials must be held to a higher standard.”
E. Carlevato: “Accountability is a very important trait for me, and the system is failing to hold those corrupt employees, agents and officers responsible.”
K. McBride: “Each person in power is responsible for his or her own actions. However, their superiors are also responsible for disciplining them.”
P. Espinal: “I would judge the government for not holding corrupt employees or officers responsible because the people are the government.”
C. Cherry: “The government should look at why the abuse of power is occurring. There has to be accountability for law enforcement officers who shoot and kill people just for having a knife. There has to be another way.”
M. James: “I would judge those individual government officials who don’t hold those corrupt employees, agents and officers responsible.”
J. Hancock: “I would hold the system accountable by deeply learning the intricacies of the system and use a remedy available to expose what is broken and what needs to be changed.”
T. Slaughter: “It is not only those corrupt agents, employees or officers, but the rich and famous are not being held responsible by the government.”