Saving lives is silliness? A stunt?

On April 16, 1963 a group of prominent white Alabama churchmen wrote Dr.  Martin Luther King Jr. an open letter demanding that he call off  demonstrations against segregation in Birmingham. The churchmen  ridiculed Dr. Kings efforts by branding the demonstrations untimely  and unwise. Kings first reaction was to shrug off their belittlement  as the rantings of yet another pack of do nothing, obstructionists and  nay sayers who delight in sitting on the side lines and taking cheap  shots at any effort made for change. They, of course, wont lift a  finger to contribute time, energy or their dollars to groups and  individuals that are trying to make positive change.
King made an  exception and responded to his frozen in the sand critics with his famed  Letter from a Birmingham Jail, The demonstrations seek to dramatize  the issue that it can no longer be ignored. King went further and said  radical action was needed to wake up citizens and involve them in the  change fight.
His response spoke to the ages and applies to the Los  Angeles Times editorial board.
They blasted the call by the Los  Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable, the L.A.Civil Rights Assn. and other  civil rights leaders for a 40 Hour King Assassination Memorial  Moratorium on Killing as silliness and a stunt. It supposedly  sullied the name and legacy of Dr. King. The tip off on the Times  misunderstanding, or deliberate distortion, of the goal of the  moratorium was its incredibly, sloppy, wrong headed, and idiotic earlier  news headline (City Council rejects ban on homicide). The Times  couldnt even get the story of what the Council did right. The Council  approved the call to end killing for 40 hours (the 40 hours marked the  40 year anniversary of the assassination) as a tribute to King.
King,  of course, passionately and eloquently argued in countless speeches,  letters, and interviews for non violence and ending killing whether in  Vietnam or the streets of Americas cities. In an article published 12  days after his murder, and what stands as his last admonition from the  grave, his voice still rang out loudly for an end to killing.
The  moratorium in his name was not a silly, utopian, or wasteful call to end  homicides. It was simply a challenge to L.A. residents that have seen  many neighborhoods in the city torn by murder violence to pay tribute to  the man who is one of world historys foremost and most beloved  champions of non-violence. The call during the period of reflection and  thought on the meaning of Kings life and death by violence was a call  to residents to commit, engage, and dialogue with friends, relatives,  and loved ones in the schools, at work and on the streets, about ways to  prevent violence in our city.
It was a timely opportunity for  citizen and community engagement, even empowerment, in the ongoing and  tormenting fight against murder violence. The moratorium was a rare  chance for Los Angeles to provide a working example and a model for  peace and nonviolence for other cities torn by murder violence. The  moratorium showed what could be done when citizens join in the fight to  take back their streets.
We talked with many persons old, and  especially, young. They, unlike the tin ears and blinded eyes of the  naysayers and head shakers on the Times editorial board got the point.  They did not ridicule or belittle the moratorium call. They are the ones  that are most at risk from violence. They hardly considered any effort  to reduce that risk as silly. They understood that if the moratorium  saved even one life during the forty hour observance then the correct  word that starts with the letter s to describe it is not stunt or  silliness but success. This sailed way over the head of the Times  editors.
Unfortunately, the moratorium did not attain one goal,  namely no homicides during the 40 hour period. There were several fatal  shootings. But the moratorium did attain the larger goals of calling  attention to Dr. King and his struggle for nonviolent solutions to  conflicts, and in engaging the community to continue the search for  proactive solutions to the murder plague in L.A.
Does this sound like  something thats silly or a stunt?
– Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an  author, political analyst and president of the Los Angeles Urban Policy  Roundtable (LAUPR). His new book is The Ethnic Presidency: How Race  Decides the Race to the White House (Middle Passage Press, February  2008). LAUPR meets Saturdays, 10a.m. at Lucy Florence Coffeehouse, 3351  W. 43rd St., Leimert Park.