A female police officer was shot and killed, following the execution of two other officers yesterday during the terror attack at the Charlie Hebdo newspaper.
The officer, and a city employee who attempted to intervene, were shot just south of Paris by two men who fled from a motor vehicle accident involving a car that match the description of the one used by the terrorists.
Once again, we are reminded of just how dangerous law enforcement can be.
Our hearts and prayers go out to the Police Nationale who must continue the hunt for the terrorists, while mourning the loss of their brothers and sisters.
Thursday, January 8, 2015
Wednesday, January 7, 2015
Terrorist attack in Paris kills 2 police officers
My heart goes out to the Police Nationale in Paris who mourn the loss of two
of their officers, executed during the terror attack that targeted the
satirical newspaper, Charlie Hebdo,
where several members of the staff were also killed.
The brave men and women of Paris' police force cannot even stop to
mourn their lost colleagues as the manhunt for the killers is on-going.
An amateur video shows the moment when the terrorists execute one of the officers, as he is lying on the ground wounded, his hands up in the air. It is an act of utter ruthless brutality which shows the dangers that the men and women of law enforcement are exposed to each and every day.
In light of the recent killings of police
officers here in the United States, it stands as a stark reminder that the thin
blue line that protects the innocent, extends, not just nationally, but around
the world.
May God bless the men and women who risk their lives to protect ours.
NYPD activity slowdown praised by the left
I recently read an article by the Free Thought Project where the headline proclaimed: “The New York Police might have just solved
the national community-policing controversy.”
The article surmised that “many people are now looking at the ‘work stoppage’
itself—which reportedly resulted in drastic reductions in arrests,
citations, and even parking tickets, as rather positive evidence that a city
with less arrests may be something to celebrate, not criticize.”
New York based journalist and radio host Allison Kilkenny
took to Twitter and commented that “Arrests
plummeted 66% but I just looked outside and nothing is on fire and the sun is
still out and everything. Weird.”
I don’t mean to sound dismissive of the article or Ms.
Kilkenny, but it is hard to wrap myself around their logic.
Now the FTP is
admittedly anti-police, so I don’t expect too much, in the way of fair
reporting, from them, but I am not well versed in Ms. Kilkenny, or her
positions, so I opted to take a closer look.
She was born in 1983, just two years before I became an NYPD
police officer, and describes herself as a social critic and blogger who covers
“budget wars, activism, uprising, dissent
and general rabble-rousing.”
That’s Awesome!
Right off the bat that tells me a little bit about her.
It says that she most likely doesn’t recall the 161,489
violent crimes that were committed in New York State, the year she was born,
driven largely in part by the crime in NYC. She probably also doesn’t remember
when it spiked to 203,311 by the time she was 9 years old. The truth is, for
the formative years of Ms. Kilkenny’s young life the New York State continually
ranked either 1st or 2nd in the nation in violent crimes.
In her defense, I probably wouldn’t have remembered, or even
cared to remember, such dark and brutal times. Unfortunately, while she was
wondering what new Barbie that Santa was going to bring her for Christmas, I
was actually working the mean streets of NYC, and it did affect me.
I recall the years where the annual murder count was in the
2k range. When robberies topped 100k and burglaries topped 200k. You see, soaring
crime rates where part of my youth as well as my career, so I understand the
significance of them. By the time she hit her teen years, crime in NYC was
dropping rapidly, even as the population level was increasing. All thanks to those much maligned, quality of
life measures, instituted under then Mayor Rudoph Giuliani and continued under
Michael Bloomberg.
I’m not saying this to trash Ms. Kilkenny, but to bring
light to the misguided notion that the slow down by NYPD’s Finest is somehow going to show just how really ‘serene’ the city actually
is.
No, Ms. Kilkenny, it’s not.
I, and the other members of the NYPD, fought long and hard
to make NYC the place it is today. We literally poured our blood, sweat and
tears on the street corners of this city, to bring order out of chaos. To make
it safer for children in minority neighborhoods to play in the streets, instead
of being huddled inside their apartments, for fear of getting caught up in a
drug deal gone bad. That is a position based on real world experience and not
some rainbows and unicorn utopian
fairy tale.
I don’t think that the 66% reduction in non-violent quality
of life crimes is anything Earth shattering, nor does it prove that the city is
a truly peaceful place. Excuse me if I’m not ready to believe that a two week
‘snippet’ is going to disprove thirty years of actual hard work and supporting data.
You see, the way I look at it, addressing quality of life
violations is akin to keeping the street lights burning. As long as the cops
are out there enforcing those laws, the lights keep the bad guys away. Stop
doing it, and it’s like the lights burn out. Once the light is gone, the
criminal element will reappear, emboldened by the fact that they cannot be
seen. Crime will increase which will only serve to embolden their activities
again.
Think that it won’t happen? Then tell me why? Show me the
empirical data to support your belief, or explain to me why, based on your
extensive experience, that you believe that allowing minor crimes to take place won’t create an environment for more
crime to thrive. That’s like going a doctor saying “oh, you have an infection,
but there is no need to treat it. It won’t spread.”
Think you’d go get a 2nd opinion on that?
Once again the left wants you to believe that it is really all the cops fault. That somehow these
evil civil servants are somehow responsible for all that ails the city. Why
shouldn’t they? The mayor said as much when he was campaigning. If the police
would just stop harassing the poor, economically depressed criminals, we would
have a veritable paradise in NYC.
Good luck with that.
Somewhere in the deep recesses of my mind I secretly wish
that the NYPD would keep this going. That they would throw in the proverbial
towel and say ‘okay, you win’. I wonder just how long it would take for the
numbers to begin creeping up. Would it take thirty years for the city to get
back to the levels of the 70’s and 80’s?
Probably not. Crime is like losing weight, it takes a
helluva lot longer to take it off then it does to put it on.
The city is a lot better off than it was in the 70’s and
80’s. One only has to look at the Times Square area to see just how big an
improvement the city has witnessed. There are a lot more potential victims,
ripe for the pickings, then there were back then. I’d venture to say that you
could realistically see a 50% increase in crime if de Blasio were to get
re-elected. This isn’t based on fiction, but a career spent in law enforcement.
Either way, it doesn’t matter to me. They say people get the
government they deserve and, right now, it seems as if the folks back in NYC certainly
have. They got too comfortable, taking the security that they enjoy, by way of
the hard work of the NYPD, as some sort of sign that the police really aren’t
needed.
I think they should embrace that concept. Let the ‘street
lights’ go out. If folks like Ms. Kilkenny are correct then nothing will burn down
and the sun will still be out shinning.
But, if she is wrong, then the men and women of the NYPD
should not be asked to put their lives on the line for a society that doesn’t
deserve it. We’ve already shed too much blood in this fight already.
They won’t do that though, because they understand that they
are the last line of defense, between the wolves that wait at the door and the
sheep who despise them.
Good luck NYC, you’re going to need it.
Monday, January 5, 2015
The NYPD turns their back on NYC Mayor (Round III)
The NYPD turns their back on NYC Bill de Blasio for the third
time.
That will be the headline, or at least a variation, which
will replay on television and newspapers around the country. Most will vilify
the men and women of law enforcement as performing some disgraceful display at
the funeral of Police Officer Wenjian Liu.
Sadly, the issue will fade from the headlines in a few days,
which brings us back to the original problem. The public display is only a
response to the forgotten actions of the mayor. The mayor turned his back on
the cops long ago, but the media seems to have forgotten that.
They provide the mayor a pulpit to speak from, whenever he chooses,
a luxury that they do not afford to the members of the NYPD. Whether you agree
or not, the officers of the NYPD are utilizing the only opportunity they have,
a finite moment before the lights turn off and the cameras get packed away. I
guess if they chose to engage in some form of civil unrest the media would cover that, but that is not who they
are. They are the forgotten protectors, bound by an oath that often calls for
them to lay down their lives.
The fact is, Mayor Bill de Blasio is not a fan of the NYPD,
or law enforcement in general, no matter what he says before the cameras.
He ran on a campaign that derided the police. He claimed
that the relationship between the minority community and the police was
‘bitter’. De Blasio also accused the police of engaging in an ‘abusive practice’
of stop and frisk, which allegedly targeted minority communities, and vowed to
put an end to it. It was a campaign that counted on voter ignorance and was
fueled by racial overtones.
What you didn’t hear reported was that Stop and Frisk is a
procedure, not a policy. One that has
been in place since 1968 when the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case: Terry v.Ohio. It simply allows the police a brief opportunity to detain a person based
on reasonable suspicion that a crime has been, or is about to be, committed.
The way Mayor de Blasio spun it; you would think that the police were arbitrarily
throwing people up against the wall for the
fun of it.
He compounded the problem by stating that he and his wife
had cautioned their bi-racial son on interactions with the police. He rebuked
the grand jury decision on the Eric Garner case and said that the police needed
to be retrained to deal with the
minority community better. I find that a bit odd, considering that over 50% of
the NYPD’s patrol officers, which includes the two officers who were
assassinated, are actually minority.
Then, when protest erupted throughout the city, he made
remarks about ‘alleged’ assaults on police officers by protesters. If that
wasn’t bad enough, he brought anti-police rabble rouser, Al Sharpton, into the
fold.
If the mayor truly was trying to repair his relationship
with the police, I would have to say that he was the unluckiest man in the world.
He has continually surrounded himself with people who hold
the same opinion as he does, which is fine when you are an individual. But when
you are the mayor, of the nation’s largest and most diverse city, you need to
be a mayor of everyone, not just the click
that got you elected. By turning his back on his police force, he is now
reaping what he has sown.
What the mayor does not talk about is that prior to his
election, the NYPD enjoyed a 75% approval rating, including a 63% approval
rating in minority communities. Hardly a number that one would say reflected a bitter relationship. But perhaps the
seeds of discontent, which he cast during the campaign, have taken hold. That
approval number has plummeted to below 50% since he came into office, a number
that eerily matches hizzoner’s own numbers.
The landslide victory, that Mayor de Blasio’s supporters
like to point to, was not. It is difficult to find the sweeping victory when the turnout amounted to only 25% of cities
registered voters. The election was more about voter apathy and disconnect then
it was about change.
He should learn a lesson from that.
If de Blasio intends on being re-elected mayor, he might
want to consider the other 75% of the electorate that didn’t vote this time
around. Otherwise, come Election Day 2017, it might not only be the police who
are turning their backs on him.
Friday, January 2, 2015
Happy New Year 2015 !!!
Ok, so I am technically a day late, but you get the idea.
At least I got the date correct. Now if I could only manage to keep that in mind as I actually write it out !!
I wish everyone a safe, healthy and prosperous New Year. In light of what we had to contend with in 2014, it seems like we have set the bar fairly low.
At least I got the date correct. Now if I could only manage to keep that in mind as I actually write it out !!
I wish everyone a safe, healthy and prosperous New Year. In light of what we had to contend with in 2014, it seems like we have set the bar fairly low.
Thursday, January 1, 2015
The NY Times takes on the NYPD
I have long held the belief that
the NY Times had lost all of its credibility and journalistic integrity as it spun a narrative rather than report the
facts. The latest piece by the paper’s editorial board, an attack on the
Nation's Finest police department, shows once and for all their true colors.
It might sound cool, to their dwindling readership, to
blast the police with their harsh advice: "1. Don't violate the Constitution. 2. Don't kill unarmed people. 3. Do
your jobs.", but it only serves to highlight their ignorance of the
issues at hand. They are like the provocative allegations of a court room attorney
who, lacking a credible case, opts to malign his opponent to the jury through
name calling and innuendo. I'm curious as to what violations of the Constitution the NYT is referring to? Not killing
unarmed people? Not enforcing the law?
This salacious accusation highlights
the disconnect between the media and the real world. Police officers do not
begin their day salivating at the opportunity to go out and kill someone. Perhaps it is the weight
of the responsibility which they carry with them, but the choice of using
deadly physical force is one that no police officer takes lightly. The fact is many
cops have paid the ultimate price because they were hesitant to pull the trigger.
Law enforcement is a serious
business and one that often has deadly consequences, both for criminals as well
as the police. A fact, that we were brutally reminded of when, on December 20th,
a madman executed two of NY’s Finest.
Theoretically, in a perfect world all criminals, major and petty,
would immediately submit to detainment and arrest when caught by the police.
Unfortunately, it has been my experience, borne out of twenty-two years in law enforcement
that, realistically, this ‘perfect world,’
does not exist.
Dr. Charles H. Webb said it best:
"There is no nice way to arrest a potentially dangerous, combative
suspect. The police are our bodyguards; our hired fists, batons and guns. We
pay them to do the dirty work of protecting us. The work we're too afraid, too
unskilled, or too civilized to do ourselves. We expect them to keep the bad
guys out of our businesses, out of our cars, out of our houses, and out of our
faces. We just don't want to see how it's done."
The NYT would have you believe
that, based on their superior understanding of all things police, that this is
not the case. That unarmed people pose no threat. It’s very easy to write that
from the comfort of your office cubicle. It’s an entirely different proposition
when you are staring the threat in the face.
So here is my challenge to the media
world. Obviously, by virtue of this article and the many others I have written,
as well as three books, I feel that I can do YOUR job quite well. Since you
seem to be adamant that you know so much of the job I performed for over two
decades, I challenge you to do a week of 4x12’s in Brooklyn North. Take your
pick. Any precinct that begins with a 7 and ends in an odd number. Heck, I know
some of you might live in upstate New York so why don’t we expand it a bit.
Perhaps you would like the Bronx, so check out the 41 or the 47.
Hell, I doubt you’d be able to
survive a day in a ‘C’ house let
alone an ‘A’ house.
I remember someone once telling
me: “Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.” I guess the same
holds true for reporters.
Then again, maybe I am being too
harsh. Perhaps they were just referring to the recent drop in enforcement
activity for traffic and minor offenses. You know, the quality of life issues such as public drinking, urination and
parking violations. The Times reported that they have all dropped by more than
90% in the wake of the police shooting. What I got a chuckle out of was the
fact that they did not mention the minor offense of sale of untaxed cigarettes,
loosies to be exact, the very same
criminal activity that that Eric Garner was engaged in prior to his death.
I think it speaks volumes as to
the hypocrisy of the left when they make a demand of ‘Do Your Jobs’ and then, a
moment later, amend that to ‘but only the ones we WANT you to do……’
After the Garner death the left
came unglued that the police were enforcing what they considered bad laws. At that time they claimed that
certain misdemeanors or violations
should be overlooked. You know, the
ones that they don’t believe in. I guess what the Times believes is that the
city needs to have two sets of laws. Then when the police arrive, those more intellectually
astute folks, like the NYT Editorial Board, can tell them whether to enforce it
or not.
Just like the millions of folks
on FB, who, despite never having set foot into a police academy, seem to know
exactly how to do it better than the
police, the Times would have you believe that it is all the cops fault.
Maybe the city can take some
advice from them and add a new course covering clairvoyance to the academy curriculum. It could be overseen by the
NYT editorial board and the teaching staff could be comprised of folks from the
Psychic Medium Network. This way, the
next time the police respond to a call they can know whether something bad will happen.
Hey, here is an idea. Maybe we
should train the dispatchers in this ability. This way, when the call comes in,
they can make the determination as to whether the complainant really needs
help.
On second thought, how about we
lay the blame squarely at the feet of those responsible: The Criminals.
Every day the police make tens of
thousands of arrests, taking people into custody without incident. Where are
the politicians and pundits applauding the hard work of the nation’s law enforcement?
Yet, when a criminal resists arrest and dies from their own actions, the police somehow become the embodiment of pure evil?
Recently, I’ve heard of a number
of journalist folks engaging in highly questionable
practices. From writing patently false stories, failing to fully investigate
and vet other stories, or being coerced by their bosses into not reporting
others because they do fit the outlets core principals or readership. I guess,
going by the NYT belief, they should all be publicly admonished.
Instead of vilifying the
protectors of the city, the NYT should turn their attention toward their
declining readership numbers. Once the flagship of the newspaper industry, the
Times’ decline illustrates a problem that seems rather obvious to everyone,
other than the editorial board. Rather than being neutral reporters of facts,
they have chosen lines and selectively use snippets to support their opinions. At one time the papers motto: "All the news that's fit to print" meant something. Now it would best be served to read: "All the news we see fit to print".
Theoretically, the Times should consider getting back to a non-biased agenda and reporting on the
facts, not contrived or misleading opinion pieces. Realistically, they won’t.
Saturday, December 27, 2014
NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio: You Own This
Today,
a gathering of police officers, from across the United States and Canada, collectively
turned their backs, while New York City mayor, Bill de Blasio, gave a eulogy
for slain NYPD officer, Rafael Ramos. I’m pretty certain this will be repeated
when Officer Liu is also eulogized.
There
are many who are outraged by this act, calling it disrespectful.
I
respectfully disagree.
I
am not a fan of the mayor, I find fault with many of his beliefs and actions.
However, that is something I can say with just about every mayor that has held office in New York City. You see, I
was born and raised in the city and gave twenty years of my life to the NYPD.
They were my ultimate boss; my commander-in-chief, so to speak. Even the
darling child of the right, Rudy Giuliani, made my list when he graciously gave us double zero’s on our
contract, after we had set record levels of crime reduction in the city.
However,
while I am willing to give most mayors a pass when we don’t see eye to eye on
an issue, I will always take exception when they turn on the police department
they are supposed to lead. My reason is simple: they are the last line of
defense the city has and they deserve the support and backing of their boss.
Former
New York City Mayor, Ed Koch, knew exactly how important the NYPD was for the
city. I worked for Koch and he was loved by the cops. He told all his
successors that you must have the support of the cops and he was right. This is
a lesson Mayor de Blasio seems to have turned a deaf ear too.
Mayor
de Blasio drew the proverbial red line in the sand with his comments following
the Eric Garner grand jury decision. The truth is Garner died as a direct
result of resisting arrest. This is all a matter of undisputed fact. The 6’4”,
300lb man, who had a criminal history dating back to the 80’s, informed
officers that he was not going to comply. When he did this, he took responsibility
for setting into motion a series of events that led to his demise. Unfortunately,
the man was asthmatic, something he probably should have considered before he
resisted arrest.
Whether
you agree or not, our society has laws in place for a reason. If you disagree
with an arrest, you do not have the right to resist. The argument, as to whether
an arrest is lawful or not, is one that should be taken up at court, not out in
the street. Garner made a conscientious choice to not comply and this decision
cost him his life.
What
happened after that is what brings us to the present day action. Mayor de
Blasio voiced his beliefs, and those comments were directed at the NYPD, not
the criminal.
His
statements were concerning alleged abuses of stop-and-frisk, a comprehensive
plan to retrain the entire NYPD to reduce the use of excessive force, changing
the policy to reduce low-level arrests, and launching a new pilot program for
body cameras to improve transparency and accountability. All of which seemed to place the blame
squarely at the foot of the police department. If that wasn’t enough, he even
commented on how he and his wife had talked to their son about encounters with
the police.
Call
me crazy, but I believe that it is the height of hypocrisy when you denigrate a
department that you depend on to provide security for you and your family.
When
the unrest erupted in the city, he seemed to take sides with the protesters,
giving them reign to run amok in the city, adding fuel to a fire that quickly
grew out of control. Was it really any shock when the chants of ‘What do we want? Dead Cops! When do we want
it? Now!” began to emerge from the crowds?
Mayor
de Blasio pandered to a base, never expecting what would happen, but that does
not relieve him from responsibility for his comments and actions. I believe in
my heart that he deserves the backlash he is getting. The old adage 'you reap what you sow' comes to mind.
But
lately, it seems that alI that I have been hearing is excuses about 'who'
didn't do this, or 'who' didn't do that. I am continually amazed at the level
of hypocrisy that emanates from those on the left. They seem willing to lay
blame so quickly, for causes they hold dear, but they are immediately incensed
when the get a dose of their own medicine. Somehow all of de Blasio’s past rhetoric
has been conveniently forgotten.
I’m
sorry Mr. Mayor, the fact is, you don’t get to ride the anti-police bandwagon as
it suits you, and then, when something happens, pretend you weren’t involved. The
left may not want to admit it, but words do count. Obviously the rhetoric being
spewed about freely by politicians, pundits and protesters resonated well
enough with the murderer of PO’s Ramos and Liu.
Now,
when the cops have had enough with their boss and his comments, somehow it is now
disrespectful when they turn their backs on him or when the PBA president makes
statements about the mayor’s actions.
It’s
kind of ironic to me that, when de Blasio asked the protesters, whom he had
previously supported, to refrain from protesting during the funerals, they
thumbed their nose at him and said no. I guess that disrespect is acceptable.
The
problem is, it's a two way street. If the protesters get to have their say, so
do we.
De
Blasio made a horrific error in judgment, he chose to make his camp among those
who only seek to tear down and destroy. He is not the first politician to err,
but his legacy will be determined by what he does going forward.
Being
a police officer in the nation’s largest city is a seemingly thankless job. The
men and women of the New York City Police Department are willing to do that
job, but they want, and deserve, a leader who will stand by them.
My
suggestion to the mayor is that he learns from this mistake and immediately issues
a mea culpa to the members of the Finest police department in the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)