Lion of the Blogosphere

Lion was right about crime increase!

On May 1st, the day that criminal charges were filed against the six police officers in Baltimore, I wrote:

[M]aybe no cops will quit their job because they can’t make as much money doing anything else. But they will stop arresting criminals in order to avoid getting in trouble. How long before we see an increase in crime?

Sure enough, just as I predicted, during the month of May, the number of arrests is down and there is a huge crime wave in Baltimore.

In a Newsweek article posted on Thursday:

The Baltimore City Fraternal Order of Police said on Thursday that Baltimore’s recent rise in crime is linked to fear among police officers that they will be arrested for doing their jobs.

This fear, the union said, comes as a result of the arrests of six officers for the death of Freddie Gray. Gray was wrongly arrested and died of injuries sustained during his arrest. The State Attorney’s Office filed charges against six officers in Gray’s death.

“The criminals are taking advantage of the situation in Baltimore since the unrest. Criminals feel empowered now. There is no respect. Police are under siege in every quarter. They are more afraid of going to jail for doing their jobs properly than they are of getting shot on duty,” union president Lieutenant Gene Ryan said in a statement.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

May 30, 2015 at 8:07 PM

Posted in Crime, News

83 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The cops can fuck off. I live 3 miles from Ferguson and the cops were useless. There were so many gunshots that it sounded like a warzone. The cops did nothing. Most of you commenters on this blog probably live in white areas where crime and violence are nonexistent. In your minds these issues are abstract since they do not effect you directly. Being a poor, white college student in a black area is not fun. My neighbors are constantly watching me to see if they can rob me. Where are the police? Harassing law abiding citizens with traffic tickets because you will not fight back and they know it. Cops are cowards. Every single one of these cops in Balitmore needs to be arrested for endangering the public because they are refusing to do their jobs. The cops only exist at this point to put the screws to the average law abiding white citizen because you will pay the stupid ticket. Anybody who sticks up for the cops is a statist piece of trash.

    NotWesley

    May 30, 2015 at 8:29 PM

    • Fucking A! These parasite animals are nothing but land pirates. They’ll turn on you in a second if their political masters command it; anything to keep the 100k+ job. Worse than useless.

      Winston Smith

      May 30, 2015 at 10:44 PM

      • Land pirates aka bandits

        XVO

        May 31, 2015 at 10:08 AM

    • “Every single one of these cops in Balitmore needs to be arrested for endangering the public because they are refusing to do their jobs”

      Arrested…. by who?

      cliff arroyo

      May 31, 2015 at 3:57 AM

    • You say that the “cops can fuck off” because they’re “useless” and “did nothing.” But if they’re useless and did nothing then they ALREADY have fucked off. The whole problem is that they have fucked off. The Lion’s claim, I believe, is that they have fucked off because they get in trouble when they don’t fuck off. People who “stick up for the cops” want them to not get in trouble for not fucking off, so that they won’t fuck off. Since you are apparently annoyed that the cops have, in fact, fucked off, and would prefer that they go about their state-prescribed duties in a non-fucking-off manner, I don’t see why you call cop-sticker-up-for-ers “statist pieces of trash.” In any case, “trash” would be the wrong word to use here. Maybe “elegant statuary”? But your assumption that people who, for example, live in Park Slope and work in midtown Manhattan are safe from “Minority” violence is false. I’ve been shoved and smacked by Blacks in Park Slope while walking there, and kicked in the groin by a dusky Hispanic in Times Square.

      Garr

      May 31, 2015 at 6:17 AM

      • NYC has ~ 4 million NAMs. You can’t avoid them, even you really wanted to, unless, you erect gates to keep them off.

        JS

        May 31, 2015 at 9:29 AM

      • I’ve been shoved and smacked by Blacks in Park Slope while walking there, and kicked in the groin by a dusky Hispanic in Times Square.

        I’ve heard stories in the past of Asian “SWPLs” being attacked by blacks and Hispanics in SWPL neighborhoods in NYC, stemming from resentment and envy of another minority group who associates with the White majority.

        JS

        May 31, 2015 at 9:51 AM

      • Bravo!

        CamelCaseRob

        May 31, 2015 at 12:48 PM

      • “I don’t see why you call cop-sticker-up-for-ers “statist pieces of trash.'”

        It’s an anarchist thing.

        aandrews

        May 31, 2015 at 10:55 PM

    • lol incredible troll job

      Bar_Back

      May 31, 2015 at 10:24 AM

    • “My neighbors are constantly watching me to see if they can rob me.”

      They are trying to help you check your privilege. Your presence makes them remember how much you benefited from slavery at their expense and they feel even further oppressed due to the realities of structural racism. If you were concerned about social justice you would leave your door unlocked when you left home.

      Curle

      May 31, 2015 at 11:15 AM

      • “They are trying to help you check your privilege.”

        lol And locking your doh is racist.

        aandrews

        May 31, 2015 at 11:03 PM

    • Most individual cops are okay people who have good instincts regarding the true relation of race and crime. But they simply are not allowed to do their rightful job. They are of course paid enforcers who have masters. It is these masters who have enacted a state of Anarcho-Tyranny; a phrase coined by the late Sam Francis.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_T._Francis#Anarcho-tyranny

      fakeemail

      May 31, 2015 at 12:11 PM

    • The Lion’s claim, I believe, is that they have fucked off because they get in trouble when they don’t fuck off.

      Which is wrong. Police officers don’t “get in trouble” when doing their jobs. In fact, the main problem is that police officers routinely engage in unconstitutional conduct without incident. And there are plenty of protections in place to ensure that even if an officer makes a mistake, it’s still very difficult to hold him liable for any damage or wrongdoing that occurred.

      So the fact that the situation in Baltimore follows a half-decade time period in which 100 separate people either settled with the City or won outright against the City in court after bringing undue force lawsuits says a lot: the cops obviously are not “fucking off.” Instead, they are fucking with innocent individuals.

      swank

      May 31, 2015 at 1:50 PM

      • That’s an interesting statistics but meaningless without the broader context of the Baltimore civil court system as a whole. Ghetto cities tend to have really corrupt pro plaintiff civil court systems. Tom Wolfe talks about this in Bonfire of the Vanities. Also if you talk to enough people that drive in areas like Baltimore you’ll find people with stories about being brought to court without cause.

        What are your thoughts on the Washington Post article that tryed to correct the faults of the FBI police killings data and get a more complete picture? http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/fatal-police-shootings-in-2015-approaching-400-nationwide/2015/05/30/d322256a-058e-11e5-a428-c984eb077d4e_story.html It puts the black victim rate at less than 30% which is more than black population but less than the percentage of black killing cops (40%) and black killers overall (50%) and strongly suggests pro black bias in police killings. It seems like common sense that if you want the police to stop assuming everyone they meet are violent you should start with how they treat relatively non violent groups not the most violent ones.

        Lloyd Llewellyn

        May 31, 2015 at 5:28 PM

      • Instead, they are fucking with innocent individuals.

        So innocent that when big city cops became, somewhat, more hesitant to patrol ghetto areas there was an almost immediate increase in crime.

        Also if you talk to enough people that drive in areas like Baltimore you’ll find people with stories about being brought to court without cause.

        You can also hear them tell stories about how AIDs and the crack epidemic were CIA plots.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        May 31, 2015 at 10:23 PM

      • Ghetto cities tend to have really corrupt pro plaintiff civil court systems.

        Do you know how difficult it is to prevail in a 1983 excessive force action? It’s not enough that an individual’s rights were violated. Police simply raise a qualified immunity defense. The individual must then show that the police officer intentionally violated those rights, which is accomplished by showing that whatever right infringed was clear and established.

        To compare….even if a criminal defendant wins an exclusionary rule motion under the 4th amendment in his criminal case (meaning the court decides that his 4th amendment rights were violated and is itself a tour de force), it does not mean that there’s a 1983 action available.

        100 people prevailing on these actions in such a short time period is remarkable.

        Also if you talk to enough people that drive in areas like Baltimore you’ll find people with stories about being brought to court without cause.

        In civil court? If that were true and there were no cause, then the judges would be granting a high amount of motions to dismiss which would toss the cases out of court. Judges everywhere gleefully capitalize on valid opportunities to lighten their caseloads.

        It puts the black victim rate at less than 30% which is more than black population but less than the percentage of black killing cops (40%) and black killers overall (50%) and strongly suggests pro black bias in police killings.

        I don’t think much can be inferred from that. You’d need stats on the encounters that lead to the shootings themselves broken down for each race. I’m not sure if there’s any special pro/con-black bias, and I’ve always said that the big mistake is making this a racial issue. Police single individuals out for almost any arbitrary reason, including but not limited to race.

        swank

        June 1, 2015 at 1:56 PM

    • @NotWesley: My neighbors are constantly watching me to see if they can rob me.

      No, they’re trying to learn proper middle-class values and behavior.

      E. Rekshun

      June 1, 2015 at 12:24 AM

  2. And your major is?

    jef

    May 30, 2015 at 11:14 PM

    • My major is Mathematics.

      NotWesley

      May 31, 2015 at 2:52 AM

      • Why did you choose to live in a black area, or better yet, what made you take up classes at a low tier university in Missouri?

        Lion’s response would be one of those hazy answers “go get a value transference career, so you don’t have to live among proles or NAMs”.

        JS

        May 31, 2015 at 12:31 PM

      • Why did you choose to live in a black area, or better yet, what made you take up classes at a low tier university in Missouri?

        Many universities with strong math programs are located in dangerous black neighborhoods. In particular, Duke and the University of Chicago come to mind.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        May 31, 2015 at 9:04 PM

      • Yale is another although I’m not sure if their area is as dangerous as Duke or U. Chicago.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        May 31, 2015 at 10:25 PM

      • It’s been know that the U of Chicago wanted to secede from the city itself, given the high crime areas in certain parts of the city, one in which the school is located.

        And going back to the discussion with the quality of life in the cities of the Meriprolestan. Not one ranks high in the numbers of the global indexes, when it comes to both safety and livability. Those that are remotely livable, are expensive and cost prohibitive for the middle class.

        JS

        June 1, 2015 at 10:16 AM

      • Cities with few black people are pretty safe. Like Portland Oregon.

      • “Cities with few black people are pretty safe. Like Portland Oregon.” ———————

        True. But, if you dislike virtue signaling your sense of decorum will take a beating.

        Curle

        June 1, 2015 at 8:40 PM

  3. I don’t consider police unions totally reliable sources when it comes to this sort of thing.

    James B. Shearer

    May 31, 2015 at 12:01 AM

    • Are you proposing that the number of homicides in Baltimore during the month of May was not at a 15 year high or are you proposing that the police are not more reluctant to do there job.

      Also, what would be an acceptable source to show that the crime rate has gone up in Baltimore and the arrest rate has gone down?

      superdestroyer

      May 31, 2015 at 8:12 AM

      • There has to be time to let different sources of statistics be vetted by different people with different biases.

        Lloyd Llewellyn

        May 31, 2015 at 9:28 AM

      • He’s suggesting the cops are performing a work slowdown as retribution for charging the six police officers and the union is using the excuse that they are afraid as cover. This makes the prosecutor look bad and makes the cops seem sympathetic.

        XVO

        May 31, 2015 at 10:11 AM

      • Just suggesting a little caution is in order. In a case like this I would prefer several sources representing different points of view. I am generally sympathetic to the police but that doesn’t mean I think they are entitled to stop doing their jobs every time they are unhappy about something.

        James B. Shearer

        May 31, 2015 at 10:44 AM

      • they are entitled to stop doing their jobs every time they are unhappy about something.

        I agree that it’s incredibly problematic. Its yet another reason why there shouldn’t be public sector employee unions.

        Lloyd Llewellyn

        May 31, 2015 at 5:36 PM

      • Although some of it may be the result of legitimate (if misguided) orders to cut down on enforcement from elected leaders.

        Lloyd Llewellyn

        May 31, 2015 at 5:38 PM

  4. “In a statement released by Hussein Soetoro and former FBI bag man Eric “My People” Holder, the two expressed pleasure that their plans are falling in place nicely as evinced by the increase in vibrant activity in Baltimore.”

    bomag

    May 31, 2015 at 12:19 AM

  5. Stupid Repub candidates are joining Hillary to ‘end mass incarceration.’ They should be saying ‘support police’ if they have any political sense.

    Dan

    May 31, 2015 at 7:56 AM

    • Most Americans still support the police so it is still a winning issue.
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/22/law-enforcement-trust-poll_n_7118634.html

      If Guiliani and Bloomberg could win as Repubs in blue, blue NYC by saying they support the police, this should be a clue, but we are dealing with the stupid party here.

      Dan

      May 31, 2015 at 8:11 AM

      • Most Americans, yes.

        Most Baltimoreans, doubtful.

        Percentage black of populations according to 2010 census:

        New York: 25.5%

        Baltimore: 63.7%

        PV van der Byl

        June 1, 2015 at 10:35 AM

      • Well its an interesting point- certainly the comeuppance of liberal policy with respect to law and order (and lack of it) has proven to be poisonous to Democrats in the past. Dinkens was seen as an abject failure, and the “white flight” from major cities was a vote of economic no confidence.

        The question this time is will the press allow it to be reported?
        There certainly was a lot of down-is-up reporting in Fergeson, Wisconsin and Baltimore. Can the voters get riled up about things that arent reported?

        Lion of the Turambar

        June 1, 2015 at 10:43 AM

  6. Newsweek stated Freddie “Gray was wrongly arrested.” Actually, Newsweek is wrongly reporting the facts. Freddie Gray was carrying a switchblade knife that the police reasonably believed was illegal under Baltimore law and therefore had just cause to arrest him. That is why the prosecutor quickly dropped the false imprisonment charges against the arresting officers.

    Mark Caplan

    May 31, 2015 at 8:29 AM

    • obviously you are spot on correct, but of course reality, the law, and the truth don’t matter worth a flying damn to the commies who are running the show–much less the US Constitution!!

      Bar_Back

      May 31, 2015 at 10:26 AM

      • Actual communists running the Soviet Union wouldn’t have put up with criminal violence, they would have sent them all to Siberia.

      • Actual communists running the Soviet Union wouldn’t have put up with criminal violence, they would have sent them all to Siberia.

        What is Russian for “it be cold out thehhh, nigga”?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        May 31, 2015 at 10:30 PM

      • “Actual communists running the Soviet Union wouldn’t have put up with criminal violence”

        Cf. http://www.unz.com/article/what-is-a-conservative-these-days/

        “Now I am beginning to notice how much more traditionalist the Communist were than our Republicans and Democrats, twin vehicles of a mental disorder that is spreading like the Black Plague in the fourteenth century. The post-World War II French Communist Party maintained traditional gender roles, much to the dismay of then Communist and later critic of the party Annie Kriegel; and it opposed Third World immigration as injurious to the French working class. Communist parties and Communist regimes frowned on homosexual relations and treated them as a telltale sign of bourgeois decadence. In the interwar period the American Communist Party took a position on race relations that one encounters these days exclusively in ‘race realist’ publications.”

        aandrews

        May 31, 2015 at 11:46 PM

    • Switchblade? How retro.

      Stealth

      May 31, 2015 at 10:40 AM

    • The knife Freddie Gray had was legal under Baltimore law. The only reason the police allegedly gave chase was that Freddie Gray looked at them and ran. The police, after later examination decided that the knife was “spring-assisted,” which would allow it to technically fall under the law in question (read: for them to make a — losing — argument that it was illegal). The arresting officer knew it was not commonly known as a switchblade, and the officer did not describe it as a switchblade in the report. Instead, the report mentions it as spring-assisted.

      Add up the facts: they tried to cover up after the fact with a post-hoc justification for chasing down an individual without any real provocation or reason, and they did this by manufacturing probable cause after the fact.

      swank

      May 31, 2015 at 2:02 PM

      • Common sense and legal precedent says that pursuing someone under those circumstances is warranted.

        Lloyd Llewellyn

        May 31, 2015 at 5:15 PM

      • My understanding is that the police are justified in pursuing and detaining anyone they see fleeing from them. When the police caught and searched Freddie Gray, they found the spring-actuated knife, which was illegal under Baltimore law. Also, as a known felon, Gray was probably prohibited from carrying any sort of weapon. So the police had established more than enough probable cause to arrest him.

        Mark Caplan

        May 31, 2015 at 5:49 PM

      • Thankfully holy saints like you are on the job. We now have had the most murderous month in Baltimore in 40 years, after those dirty rotten police were put back in their proper place.

        Something tells me his holiness rev. swank is not going to be buying real estate in Baltimore anytime soon.

        Dan

        May 31, 2015 at 8:10 PM

      • Pursuit under reasonable suspicion is allowed because fleeing from police in a high crime area gives rise to reasonable suspicion.

        Reasonable suspicion is not probable cause. Probable cause is required to arrest.

        The blade Freddie Grey had is not illegal under Baltimore law. Even the prosecutor admitted it. The arresting cop also knew it wasn’t known as a switchblade. Putting these facts together leads to the conclusion that they tried to manufacture probable cause after the fact, which leads to the likely conclusion that their story about him fleeing unprovoked is also likely untrue.

        Hate to shatter the just world illusions here but cops lie. A lot.

        Swank

        May 31, 2015 at 11:27 PM

      • Now you’ve changed your argument entirely to say that the arrest was unwarranted because the cops are lying. That may be true but of course you could make that argument about almost any arrest.

        Lloyd Llewellyn

        June 1, 2015 at 12:31 AM

      • I didn’t change my argument at all. The fact that they manufactured probable cause after the fact inducates that their original reason for chasing Freddie Grey is false. I said this in the sub-thread opener.

        And no the arrest wasn’t unwarranted because the cops lied. The arrest was unwarranted because the knife isn’t in fact illegal and the arresting cop didn’t have any real indication that it was illegal when arresting Freddie Grey: no probable cause.

        An arrest is legal if there was probable cause — even after the fact. Cops get lucky on that basis all the time.

        Swank

        June 1, 2015 at 12:20 PM

      • Switchblade or not, spring assisted knives are illegal under state and city laws. Even if the prosecutor says the knife wasn’t illegal, officers are allowed to make a good faith arrest. If the prosecutor thinks there isn’t sufficient evidence of a crime then the charges are dismissed. Either way, the officers didn’t do anything wrong by arresting Freddie Gray. Lots of people are arrested only to have the charges reduced or dropped.

        destructure

        June 2, 2015 at 6:34 AM

      • Switchblade or not, spring assisted knives are illegal under state and city laws.

        No they are not illegal per se. Maryland law defines a switchblade as one that opens automatically by direct hand pressure to a device in the handle, be it a button or a spring. Baltimore law prohibits devices with an automatic spring and specifically states “commonly known as a switchblade.” So no, you are wrong when you preface your statement with “switchblade or not.” It needs to be a switchblade.

        A knife that must be manually opened, even partially, before any device in the handle works, does not fall under that definition — no direct hand pressure is applied to the device in the handle. Instead, the opening of the knife or pressure on the blade itself is what activates the device.

        Even if the prosecutor says the knife wasn’t illegal, officers are allowed to make a good faith arrest.

        Which there is no evidence of. The arresting officer had no indication the knife was a switchblade or spring-assisted before making the arrest, even by his own arrest report. In his words, he just noticed a knife and then arrested Grey and then after the fact “discovered” that the knife was spring-assisted. The likely actual story: Grey was arrested and handcuffed before the officers even knew he had a knife.

        Either way, the officers didn’t do anything wrong by arresting Freddie Gray. Lots of people are arrested only to have the charges reduced or dropped.

        And in many, if not most, of those cases the police did do something wrong by arresting the individual, i.e. lack probable cause. However, the police are simply shielded from liability despite having been in the wrong.

        swank

        June 2, 2015 at 12:27 PM

      • The reality is that he was arrested because the cops knew he was criminal scum, an approach to policing that kept Baltimore’s crime rate lower than it would be without such policing.

      • The reality is that he was arrested because the cops knew he was criminal scum

        Criminal scum or no, police need probable cause.

        an approach to policing that kept Baltimore’s crime rate lower than it would be without such policing.

        Based on what? Not even a month? Deterrence theory regarding arrest and crime rates is likely incorrect. Arrests follow crime and not the other way around. So of course there’s a spike in crime following massive riots and unrest. It has little or nothing to do with whether cops are on their usual harassing beats.

        Recently in New York, crime declined after cops decided to throw a similar temper-tantrum and make fewer arrests.

        swank

        June 2, 2015 at 1:18 PM

      • Oh look, swank is right:

        “Mr. Gray was handcuffed at his surrendering location, moved a few feet away, and placed in a prone position with his arms handcuffed behind his back, all before the arresting officers found the knife.”
        http://www.wsj.com/articles/baltimore-prosecutors-say-freddie-gray-arrest-was-illegal-before-finding-knife-1432076045

        swank

        June 2, 2015 at 1:55 PM

      • Placing a suspect in handcuffs does not automatically equate to an arrest. Since he ran, it’s reasonable for them to cuff him while they detain and search him. An illegal knife would give them grounds for an arrest. The legality of the knife would be up to the prosecutor and courts. The knife being legal wouldn’t mean the officers acted improperly. Plenty of arrests end up with charges being dropped.

        destructure

        June 3, 2015 at 9:55 AM

      • Constitutionally, per court decisions, if you are handcuffed then you are arrested, even if the local criminal code wants to call it something else and the police don’t write it up as an “arrest.”

      • An illegal knife would give them grounds for an arrest.

        Because you apparently can’t read: there’s no evidence they made the arrest on good faith. Even by the officer’s own arrest report, he simply noticed -a- knife, then arrested Freddie Grey. Several knives are legal to conceal carry in Baltimore; the fact that an individual has a knife does not give probable cause for arrest. And all this from the report’s face. The reality of the situation that I deduced and which is apparently the truth, is even worse.

        Placing a suspect in handcuffs does not automatically equate to an arrest.

        The standard for an arrest is whether a reasonable person would believe his freedom of movement to the degree associated with a formal arrest. Grey was handcuffed and placed in a prone position.

        The exception you’re talking about incident to Terry stops for safety reasons is inapplicable here: no precaution was taken to advise Grey that he was being temporarily detained.

        Lots of people are arrested only to have the charges reduced or dropped.

        Yes, the police routinely abuse their power. FYI, when the prosecutor decides not to bring charges, it pretty much means the police were in the wrong. The prosecutor is a zealous advocate on behalf of the state. If he can’t file, something is seriously wrong.

        swank

        June 3, 2015 at 12:16 PM

      • @ swank “Because you apparently can’t read: there’s no evidence they made the arrest on good faith.

        Apparently you can’t think. They don’t need evidence that the arrest was on good faith. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

        ***
        @ Leon “Constitutionally, per court decisions, if you are handcuffed then you are arrested”

        You should contact these courts and let them know that.

        Gallegos v. City of Colorado Springs
        “A Terry stop does not automatically elevate into an arrest where police officers use handcuffs on a suspect or place him on the ground. Police officers are authorized to take such steps as are reasonably necessary to protect their personal safety and to maintain the status quo during the course of a Terry stop.”

        People of California v. Osborne
        United States v. Stewart
        All cases where handcuffing during an investigative detention was reasonable.

        In re Carlos M. 220 CA3 372,385 (1990)
        “The fact that a defendant is handcuffed while being detained does not, by itself, transform a detention into an arrest.”

        United States v. Acosta-Colon
        “Officers engaged in an otherwise lawful stop must be permitted to take measures—including the use of handcuffs—they believe reasonably necessary to protect themselves from harm, or to safeguard the security of others.”

        Haynie v. County of Los Angeles
        “A brief, although complete, restriction of liberty, such as handcuffing, during a Terry stop is not a de facto arrest, if not excessive under the circumstances.”

        US v. Neff, 300 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2002)
        The allowable scope of an investigative detention cannot be determined by reference to a bright-line rule; “common sense and ordinary human experience must govern over rigid criteria.”

        United States v. Hensley, 469 US 221 (1985)
        When police have a reasonable suspicion, grounded in specific and articulable facts, that a person they encounter was involved in or is wanted in connection with a completed felony, then a Terry stop may be made to investigate that suspicion

        Since police officers should not be required to take unnecessary risks in performing their duties, they are authorized to take such steps as [are] reasonably necessary to protect their personal safety and to maintain the status quo during the course of [a Terry] stop.

        United States v. Maguire
        The use of handcuffs to address legitimate officer safety concerns during a Terry stop or investigative detention does not transform that detention into an arrest

        Bruzy and Riordan v. Trooper Joyner, et. al.
        Troopers received a report of a possible gunshot fired from a vehicle. The vehicle was the subject of a high risk stop and the occupant (Bruzy) was handcuffed. Her fiance, Riordan, was traveling in a separate vehicle and stopped ahead of the scene. He was also detained and handcuffed, despite not being party to the original complaint. They filed a lawsuit and the court ruled that the detention and handcuffing were lawful measures taken in response to reasonable, articulable suspicion, and no “full blown arrest” occurred.

        destructure

        June 6, 2015 at 4:29 AM

  7. There were four murders in NYC this past Friday. A Hispanic stabbed in the Bronx, and three blacks shot at different locations in Queens and Brooklyn.

    Peter

    ironrailsironweights

    May 31, 2015 at 9:30 AM

    • And that’s a problem?

      Pendejo

      May 31, 2015 at 6:07 PM

    • NAMs killed by other NAMs, a phenomenon as common as urban hipsters packing a punch at the Sunday – SWPL brunch!

      JS

      May 31, 2015 at 8:15 PM

  8. A lot of what caused the recent decades long drop in crime is unknown. The unknown factors likely come mainly down to cultural shifts among criminally inclined populations. Probably as harmful as any change in police behavior is the telling gullible criminally inclined people that the laws and police have no legitimacy and exist only to oppress them.

    Lloyd Llewellyn

    May 31, 2015 at 9:31 AM

    • “what caused the recent decades long drop in crime is unknown”

      Bah, there’s no mystery. They locked all the bad people up, where they could only do bad stuff to each other behind bars. But to test this hypothesis to make absolutely sure it is right, Hillary is going to work to free a bunch of those crooks and then we’ll see what happens.

      Dan

      May 31, 2015 at 8:14 PM

      • The statistics don’t bear that out. You see for instance a similar reduction in crime in Canada over the same period without the same increase in incarceration. People that actually study the issue say it’s not fully understood.

        Lloyd Llewellyn

        June 1, 2015 at 12:32 AM

      • @Lloyd Llewellyn

        “Canada’s prison population at all-time high”
        http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada-s-prison-population-at-all-time-high-1.2440039

        It takes people with intelligence to reason themselves away from the obvious truth, which is that punishment deters crime.

        Dan

        June 1, 2015 at 9:36 AM

      • Is it the punishment? Or merely keeping the criminal element off the street?

      • Keeping criminals isolated from their crime targets helped to lower crime. Locking them up was one major way of doing that but it wasn’t the only way. There’s also been a big increase in building locks, alarm systems and surveillance cameras and that’s helped. Finally, people have just moved away from high crime areas and have learned to avoid entering them. Criminals have been isolated in a number of ways, not just putting them in prison.

        Mark

        June 1, 2015 at 1:57 PM

      • Gated communities help to reduce crime! Or maybe just move it somewhere else.

      • Gated communities help to reduce crime!

        Not significantly.

        Police in all the areas where the authors conducted focus groups reported at best marginal differences in crime between gated and ungated developments. Most found no difference; crime rates varied by area but not between gated and ungated neighborhoods in the same area. A few even believed they hampered police efforts, because gates slowed response time, walls blocked sight lines, and residents gained a false sense of security, leading them to leave garage doors open and doors and windows unlocked

        Click to access Blakely&Snyder_1998.pdf

        swank

        June 1, 2015 at 4:24 PM

      • Well if the crime in the gated community with garage doors open and doors and windows unlocked is the same as in the ungated neighborhood with everything locked, then the gates worked!

      • That’s not what the paragraph says. In most cases there was no difference. In a few cases, police believed it made things worse because of actions like leaving doors open, etc.

        swank

        June 1, 2015 at 5:30 PM

  9. It’s basic Darwin. If you, belong to a group that is wildly overrepresented in crime statistics and run away as soon as you see the police, then…. nothing good is going to happen.

    If you demonize the police, the criminals aren’t going to stay home until the police stop being mean an arresting people who look and act like criminals.

    Newsflash: Police don’t have ESP.

    cliff arroyo

    May 31, 2015 at 9:46 AM

  10. Cops are damned if they do and damned if don’t. I see cops as a necessary evil; with them, society sucks; without them, we go to hell in a handbasket. At least Obama passed that order so police can’t ride around in military tanks with assault rifles.

    Lion of the Judah-sphere

    May 31, 2015 at 9:50 AM

  11. O/T – Legal Insurrection has a post about bumper stickers and the comments veer into a discussion of the stick figure family stickers (though status signaling doesn’t make an appearance on that site’s comments, not their forte). Is the competition among females to have a family so strong it compels this form of status signaling (the stick figure sticker)?

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/05/family-values/

    Curle

    May 31, 2015 at 12:30 PM

  12. OT, but not really, have you read this lion?
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2913625/Billionaire-George-Soros-spent-33MILLION-bankrolling-Ferguson-demonstrators-create-echo-chamber-drive-national-protests.html

    “Billionaire George Soros spent $33MILLION bankrolling Ferguson demonstrators to create ‘echo chamber’ and drive national protests”

    rivelino

    May 31, 2015 at 2:02 PM

    • Dude is evil. He probably knows that if more NAM criminals were left on the streets they would just kill more NAM’s.

      not too late

      May 31, 2015 at 11:21 PM

  13. I live in Cincinnati and the same jump in crime rates occurred after our 2001 anti-cop riot.

    trey

    May 31, 2015 at 2:15 PM

  14. The police are laying down their arms around ‘vibrant’ neighborhoods? I’m all in favor; liberals will again be reminded of what the inferior races are like left to their own devices, and the American gene pool will get a long overdue, if too small, Darwinian cleansing.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    May 31, 2015 at 3:13 PM

  15. “Sunday’s homicides — which brought the total for 2015 to 116 — came amid a continuing spike in shootings.” Definitely on track to beat last year’s total body count.

    Okay, so, last year 208 people were murdered in Baltimore, 189 of the victims were black males. So, if every single one of the others were white, then blacks are murdered at 10 times the rate as whites. Yeah, it sure the hell does not look like black bodies matter too much to the black officials running Baltimore.

    But how can this be possible? I mean, Baltimore has gun control laws!!! It must need more gun control laws.

    not too late

    May 31, 2015 at 11:33 PM

  16. So, it looks like less police oppression means more dead bodies.

    jef

    June 1, 2015 at 4:03 PM


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: