For those who don't know, John White is a hard-working father, who scrimped and saved to buy his family a home in an upscale Long Island neighborhood. The well-liked man who had never been in trouble with the law had his life turned upside down one night in 2006; that's when he shot and killed a drunk white teen with an illegal weapon in his driveway. The teen and his group of equally belligerent friends had come to the White home threatening to kill White's teenage son, Aaron.
Why you might ask? A rumor had circulated that the black teen was planning to rape a white girl. After 17-year-old Daniel Cicciaro and his friends shouted racial slurs, White came out of his home carrying a handgun. He pointed at Cicciaro during a confrontation and then the gun allegedly went off accidentally. Unfortunately, the jury didn't buy it. He was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to two to four years behind bars.
You would think that would be the end of the story but it's not. Cicciaro's family held an expletive-laced press conference where Cicciaro's father complained that his sentence was too light and then he shouted ""Well, let's see what happens when Aaron White gets shot and see how the laws are," Cicciaro said.
The police took this as a threat and added additional police protection for the White family.
Now, Cicciaro's statements beg the question, was this case sparked by vigilante justice? And, if it was, when does an eye for an eye end?
Cicciaro and his friends went to Mr. White's home trying to prevent an alleged rape. Yet, if they were truly interested in justice, wouldn't the police have been a better stop than Mr. White's driveway? It would seem that went there to act as their own regulating unit.
Mr. White's hands aren't clean either. He too chose not to call the authorities and to retaliate against what he saw as an angry white mob. White's wife has argued that he had every right to protect their home and family.
But the question must be asked, when and to what extent do we have the right to retaliate?
The defense suggested that White should have gone in his house, ignored the mob and called the police. Is that something a reasonable person would do? Would you? Or, would you use your constitutionally protected right to bear arms to defend your home and property?
The judge and jurors in this case seem to have sided with White, recognizing his right to do something. Instead of getting the maximum sentence he was shown leniency.
"While Mr. White may be the only individual who bears criminal responsibility ... there are moral accessories in the death of Daniel Cicciaro," the judge said, referring to the young men who accompanied Cicciaro.
"They did not hold the gun, they did not pull the trigger, but they share responsibility," the judge said.
However, we don't want a society filled with vigilantes. After all, that is why we have gun laws. Though they vary from state-to-state, the objective is to allow people to defend themselves and not to act offensively.
It is still debatable whether Mr. White used his right to bear arms appropriately.
1. Mr. White should have called the police. His son arrived at the house well within time for papa to call 911. Instead, he reached for the gun and waited for the kids to arrive. I'm glad he had a gun to protect his family from the potential ensuing harm done to his family by this racist b@$tard, but much of this situation could have been averted had he deferred to law enforcement - A father would not be face time away from his family, his son would not carry the guilt of knowing he in part is the cause of his father behind bars, and the hate-spewing prick would still be alive.
shell at 1:54PM on Mar 20th 2008