We live in a country that can undisputedly be classified as one of the most powerful nations in the world. We live in a Democratic society where we are able to actively participate in our nation’s governing process by electing local, state, and federal leaders. We live in a country that was founded upon the belief that “all men are created equal.” Or do we? Even though the United States leads the world in practically every aspect of life, we fall behind in the struggle between race, class, age, ability, sexuality, and surprisingly our laws.
Although the United States is governed under the Constitution and its amendments, states have their own constitutions and laws. Now, how is this fair and equal for all? This means that the penalties for the same crime can vary depending on the state where the crime is committed. Consequently, a person can commit a crime in Florida and be sentenced to prison for 10 years, and another person can commit the same crime in California and receive probation or maybe nothing at all. For a better example, Plaxico Burress, former New York Giant, was recently tried for criminal possession of a handgun in the second degree after accidentally shooting himself in the right thigh in a New York nightclub last November. Plaxico eventually accepted a plea deal that would only imprison him for two years instead of the maximum punishment of the crime, fifteen years. In New York, criminal possession of a weapon is a serious offense that is classified in three degrees with the Second and Third Degrees classified as felonies, and the Fourth Degree a misdemeanor. Whereas in Georgia, the law for criminal possession states, “A person commits the offense of unlawful possession of firearms or weapons when he or she knowingly has in his or her possession any sawed-off shotgun, sawed-off rifle, machine gun, dangerous weapon, or silencer, and, upon conviction thereof, he or she shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of five years.” This means that a person may possess any other type of weapon or handgun that is not clearly stated in the law. Thus, meaning that if Plaxico would have committed this “crime” in Georgia, he would not be facing jail time nor would he have been released from the New York Giants. The harshest punishment he would have faced in Georgia would have been the ridicule of his teammates and associates.
Do not mistake the fact that the Constitution and its laws are the Supreme Law of the Land. The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution holds that all federal laws preempt state laws unless the federal law is unconstitutional. Therefore, the only way that the federal law will be applied to a criminal offense in a state is if the case is appealed to the Supreme Court or if the case goes straight to the Supreme Court for other reasons. So what are we to conclude? Are we truly living equally in the United States when states have differing laws? Would we progress to becoming a truly equal nation if the laws for every state were the same? Or would we just create more tension between the struggles of class, race, gender, and so on?
Aristotle once said, “Equality consists in the same treatment of similar persons.” Although we descend from different cultures and nationalities, believe in various religions, and vote with a particular political party, we are all still Americans, and we should live and practice the beliefs that our Founding Fathers established this country on; that all men are created equal.
References
“Georgia Firearms & Weapon Related Laws.” LegallyArmed.com. 2008. 30 Aug. 2009
Grace, Melissa, et al. “Former Giants star Plaxico Burress accepts surprise plea bargain, will spend two years in jail.” NYDailyNews.com 20 Aug. 2009. 30 Aug. 2009
Murray, Don. “Criminal Possession of a Weapon in New York.” Shalley & Murray. 2008. 30 Aug. 2009
Response by Gaybrielle LeAnn Gant
Equality or Interpretation by Gaybrielle LeAnn Gant
It is safe to concur that America is a nation built on the principles of "Freedom and Justice FOR ALL" as well as the notion that "Every man was created equal". Those assumptions feel good because as a thriving and powerful nation who seeks to capitalistically control every function and movement domestically and abroad, how could this country in anyway shape or form not preach the morals and ideals of equality amongst its people. That question may be heavy laden with the representation of America's history to exclude many people from their poetic and boastful claims of inclusions. This nation which was created as a safe haven for those fleeing abuse and corruption of totalitarian dictatorship and the Kings rule, inadvertently created a nation that significantly preached more than it was truly able to give. As the alluring shores of freedom beckoned all creeds and races, the founding Fathers were not "all inclusive" when they founded this nation. Their declaration of "WE THE PEOPLE" did not include all people who inhabited their newly acquired land, nor did it include those who they willingly forced into bondage. Africans, Native Americans, Savages, Creoles, Zambos, Mestizos, Lobos, Chinos and every other race that fell outside of European White descendant privilege was not included in the founding ideals of this nation. So justifiably the idea of the “pursuit of happiness and justice for all” accordingly applies to those in which the laws and creeds intended for them to apply to. As the constitution has been amended to be inclusive, we must not forget its original classification and definition of the freedoms that it details. Just as the constitution stood to exclude many and serve the power of few, the laws of the state replicate the constitutions power and privilege. The states use their laws to either exclude or include. The manipulation of power is unprecedented in the fact that "equal" states have more lenient or stricter laws. The laws of the states have been constructed to serve the needs of those in power and rule. They specifically seek out people to continually oppress and deny. So as different states impose different charges for the same crimes we unveil the notion that "equality” and "we the people" as well as "justice for all" is specifically contingent upon the actual interpretation of "equal" from those who hold power. Regardless if that interpretation is truly equal or fare, equality is defined by those who hold a high enough office to control and dictate the actual definition and inclusion of specific freedoms. In short, those who set the rules define the rules, those who assign the notion that something is equal or not, merely hold the power to allow that equality to be actualized.
