THE GAY GUY AND THE INDIAN GUY
The Indian guy got away with murder.
Not literally, but metaphorically.
He violates some kid’s privacy, the kid ends up dead, and the Indian guy gets 30 days in jail.
This is the story of the gay guy and the Indian guy, and how any number of activists tried to use the story to advance their own agenda.
It’s also the story of a miscarriage of justice.
Rutgers is a big, fancy university. To get in, you’ve either got to have lots of money or be a desirable demographic.
The gay guy and the Indian guy ended up roommates. Both were freshmen, both were 18. Both presumably came from high schools where they were prominent.
And both became punk freshmen, low men on the totem pole, trying to survive college life.
Only one of them did.
The gay guy asked the Indian guy if he could have the dorm room to himself one evening, he wanted to have a guest over.
Another gay-guy guest.
Indian guy agreed.
After he set up his webcam.
He set up a spy camera that transmitted the happenings in the room on the Internet.
While he sat a few rooms away, watching and mockingly tweeting his arse off. He was inviting other people to click on and watch the freak show.
Gay guy finds out, he’s really bothered, he finds out Indian guy is planning a second secret broadcast of his private life, and he jumps off a bridge.
Just after he checked Indian guy’s Twitter account for the 38th time.
That’s when the stuff hit the fan.
Gay activists said it was a bias crime, bullying activists said it was bullying. Each did handstands to attract attention to pet causes. Each tried to twist this incident to fit special agendas.
When it doesn’t.
This had nothing to do with gay bashing or bullying.
Two topics, by the way, which are nauseatingly overdone.
First of all, on the issue of special protections for gays – or anyone else – that is fundamentally un-American. No special rights for special people. All men are created equal and equal protection under law is our Constitution’s promise. If you get poked in the nose, it should violate the same law and be treated the same way, no matter who you sleep with.
Further, gay activists act as if sexual orientation is the central, defining, must-be-talked-about characteristic of life. For them, it’s something that must be announced and re-announced and worn around like a chip on the shoulder.
Which is ridiculous.
Most people keep their sexual preferences to themselves. Most people think announcing them is classless.
Society may not really care that I like women with exceptionally large breasts. Similarly, it may not really care that gay guys like each other or that you like your husband to dress up like the Marlboro man.
This case, ultimately, had nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that the gay guy was a gay guy.
Similarly, it had nothing to do with bullying.
The entire bullying movement is a ploy to tighten the muzzle of political correctness. It is the next step in the effort to enforce the orthodoxy of liberalism. If you say homosexual sex is a sin, that’s bullying. If you suggest welfare people should get a job, that’s bullying. If you put a Romney sticker on your car, that’s bullying.
This case isn’t about bullying.
It’s about an invasion of privacy.
And to understand that, forget about the gay guy and the Indian guy. Think, instead, about yourself.
And your bedroom.
In his dorm room, the gay guy had an expectation of privacy. The same expectation of privacy that you would expect in your bedroom.
In your bedroom, you may or may not be clothed. You may or may not engage in activities you would want people to see. You might even engage in sexual activities.
And in your bedroom, you have every right to expect that your activities are private – and that no one else is surreptitiously looking in.
Suppose that someone put a secret camera in your bedroom and posted its streaming video to the Internet.
What would you think of that?
If a spy camera was used, without your permission, to potentially expose your naked body and your intimate activities to the entire world, how serious a violation of decency and law would that be?
Or, what about this.
What if, instead of putting the camera in your bedroom, it was put in the bedroom of your 18-year-old daughter.
What would you think of that?
Would you think that either of those violations – spying on the bedroom of you or your daughter – and what do you think would be an appropriate legal punishment?
Does 30 days cut it?
Not no, but heck no.
Strip away the gay issue from this, forget the bullying nonsense, and see this for what it is – a cut-and-dried invasion of privacy.
A horrendous, hideous, hateful invasion of privacy.
That deserves a lot more than 30 days in jail. It deserves time in prison.
The Indian guy didn’t even apologize. His mommy and daddy begged for leniency. He never once expressed regret.
Somehow he could get into Rutgers, but he never learned that you don’t peek behind other people’s closed doors.
And we all know it was a factor in some kid jumping off a bridge.
Lock him up.
And deport him.
And keep him away from the webcam.
- by Bob Lonsberry © 2012