Monday, November 27, 2006

New York Mayor Bloomberg Sold His Soul Today

That Billionaire mayor spent the day kissing his city's African-American troublemakers asses by suggesting there was wrongdoing by several New York cops. This came well before the investigation has been conducted or concluded into that Queens, strip club shooting. Bloomberg did some major patronizing of Al Sharpton and his merry band of thugs.

The rub is a simple one. Frankly, for the time being, I don’t expect New York cops to do much in the way of police work or revenue generating citation writing until some drastic efforts are made to be reasonably fair to working cops. If I were a New York cop today my reports would read like War And Peace. I’d be so busy getting the details of minor theft or property damage reports absolutely correct I'd lave little time for anything else. That of course would protect me from responding to those calls where you have to arrest people, especially African-Americans. I fully expect cops to act more like tourists as they patrol New York avoiding trouble at all cost. Why should any New York cop subject himself to this treatment by a city that will sell him out in a life or death situation?

This may be time for New York's criminal element to get their piece of New York. Perhaps that might convince people like Bloomberg that cops are both wanted and needed in New York. If that's not the case let them wallow in their decadence, crime and yes, their own blood.

This is not a good time in a city where goofy laws have made sure that only the criminals have guns. Can you say hello, National Guard?

New Yorkers have all too soon forgotten the huge sacrifices made by their cops during and long after the 9/11 attack. If they were really grateful New York citizens would storm City Hall with rakes, torches and pickaxes demanding that worthless mayor’s resignation. There should be enough real citizens to make Shapton’s thugs look like what they are.


Anonymous said...

Amen, why risk everything, encluding your life policing people who claim the police are the problem. I'd go to work and jut collect a check. Need help call Sharpton.

Anonymous said...

The first rush to judgment occured when a gang of men started shooting at three guys leaving a bachelor party. They may have said they were cops, but there was nothing that showed they were cops, and they had just tried to grab the driver, who naturally tried to escape what appeared to be a bunch of thugs. This rush to judgment killed a guy.

Another rush to judgment occured when the cops were defended. Just as it's a rush to assert that the cops were at fault, it's a rush to say the cops were blameless, especially when some facts available -- plain clothes, unmarked vehicles, no weapon, 30 rounds fired by one cop -- suggest the police may have some culpability.

Face it, the cops performed poorly from start to finish. If they performed consistent with policy, then the policy needs to change. If they performed contrary to policy, then you ought not defend them.

I really appreciate your work for Ronnie Barlow. (BTW, the jury in that case assumed Barlow would do no time when they convicted him.) But to support in this Sean Bell case the idea that if cops are held to reasonable performance standards when they screw up then they should stop working -- that's just wrong.

As for the comment "why risk everything ... just collect a check." Since the reason cops are given a check is to "risk everything," if they're not going to "risk everything" then they should not be given checks, should they? I believe what the people are saying is not that cops are the problem but that poorly performing cops (and the policies that enable them) are part of the problem.

While Bloomberg may have sold his soul to Al Sharpton, good cops sell their souls when they defend bad cops.

Paul Huebl Crimefile News said...

Unlike politicians and most people in our world cops have to rush to make a split-second judgement when their very life hangs in the ballance.

Before I took on the Ronnie Barlow case and put my reputation on the line for that lad, I investigated the case fully. It was a worthwhile effort that brought delayed justice. In the beginning the NAACP and the African-American community turned its back on Barlow because of false assumptions.

You’ve made a lot of assumptions, as did Bloomberg as to the conduct of the officers in this New York mess. That’s my whole point! Let a fair and impartial investigation take its course and punish anyone who truly deserves punishment.

Cops deserve fait treatment just like anyone else. We as society must make sure they are not turned into scapegoats for the risky behavior of a bunch of drinking and drugging party animals out chasing whores at a strip club.

If cops are not treated fairly a job action of some sort is warranted.

Anonymous said...

Well I think everyone can agree that the police strive to avoid killing innocent people, and that when an innocent person gets killed by the police something has gone seriously wrong. Rather than circle the wagons the police should be open to any constructive criticism that will help them in future efforts not to kill innocent people. I'm with the blogmaster on this; let a fair investigation take its course, and if anyone deserved to be punished they should be punished.

Anonymous said...

Are all whites Racist?

Someone else besides me has finally said it, but I have thought it for years. How many are actually
paying attention to this?
There are African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, Arab Americans, Native Americans, etc. and then there are just Americans.
You pass me on the street and sneer in my direction.
You call me "White boy," "Cracker," "Honkey," "Whitey," "Caveman" and that's OK.
But when I call you, Nigger, Kike, Towelhead, Sand-nigger, camel Jockey, Beaner, Gook, Burrhead, Blue, Jiggaboo or Chink you call me a racist. You say that whites commit a lot of violence against you, so why are the ghettos the most dangerous places to live?
You have the United Negro College Fund.
You have Martin Luther King Day.
You have Black History Month.
You have Cesar Chavez Day.
You have Yom Hashoah
You have Ma'uled Al-Nabi
You have the NAACP.
You have BET.
If we had WET(White Entertainment Television) we'd be racists.
If we had a White Pride Day you would call us racists.
If we had White History Month, we'd be racists.
If we had any organization for only whites to "advance" our lives, we'd be racists.
We have a Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, a Black Chamber of Commerce, and we just have the plain Chamber of Commerce. Wonder who pays for that?
If we had a college fund that only gave white students scholarships, you know we'd be racists. There are over 60 openly proclaimed Historically Black Colleges in the US, yet if there were a "White college" it would be a racist college.
In the Million Man March, you believed that you were marching for your race and rights. If we marched for our race and rights, you would call us racists.
You are proud to be black, brown, yellow and orange, and you're not afraid to announce it. But when we announce our white pride, you call us racists.
You rob us, carjack us, and shoot at us. But, when a white police officer shoots a black gang member or beats up a black drug dealer running from the law and posing a threat to society, you call him a racist.
I am proud to be white and American. Everyone should be proud of their heritage and I allow you to be so. Why won't you allow me the same courtesy without you calling me a racist.
They tell me that blacks and other ethnicities can't be racist, but actually they prove everyday to be
greater racist than me. And, their insults are ignored by the media and the government.
Why is it that only whites can be racists?

Anonymous said...

In reply to anonymous "Are all whites racist" "You rob us, carjack us, and shoot at us" I think you need clarify what you mean by "you" and "us" because the way you describe it here it sounds like you are saying that it is only minorities who commit violent crimes, and it is only whites who are their victims. You also make it sound like minorities need to take collective responsibility for crimes committed by individuals of the same ethnicity, and that whites are collectively victimized by minorities as a whole. I think that if you looked into this deeper, there is a stronger correlation between violent crime and socio-economic status than there is between violent crime and race. You also use the word "you" collectively to characterize everyone who is different from yourself, lumping Jews, Blacks, Hispanics, etc. into a single mass that supposedly gets special treatment.

Finally, race IS an issue here, if only for the fact that there is a long history of police brutality against minorities simply because they were minorities. Also, whether you would like to admit it or not, there ARE racist cops out there; I've worked with some of them over the years. Unlike you though, I look at them as individual and not a group, and so am not going to collectively condemn all cops.

It's Not All Real said...

I'm a chicago cop for 20 years, and my non cop friends asked me if I thought 50 shots was excessive. My answer: It's not the number of shots that need to be addressed, only if the shots were justified. As long as the cops were justified in shooting, how many shots they fired is not material. Remember the old timer when asked why he shot the bad guy six times? His reply "cuz the gun only had six shots!"

We've been taught to shoot until the threat is over, and if that's 50 shots, then 50 shots it is. Just as long as the FIRST shot is justified, the rest is just insurance.

So the mayor spoke off his big mouth before it could be determined if the FIRST shot was justified. Typical politician who treats the cops like cannon fodder. Fuck him!!