ObamaLaw – coming to a police department near you! – Wrapping it up

This is the final part of my analysis of the Interim Report filed by the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing (a). This blog post is going to analyze the “Implementation” section of the report and then I’m going to wrap all of this up in a nice, neat, little package of truth and top it off with a bow of reality. Liberals and Obama-llama ding dongs are not going to like it. Tough crap. As a fellow patriot keeps reminding me, we’re way past the point of sugar-coating things.

Quick recap….the Task Force was created last December by way of Obama’s ‘pen and phone’ in direct response to the unrest in Ferguson. If you have read any of the other blog posts (b) you know that my biggest gripe with this whole issue is that they’re trying to fix something that isn’t broken while ignoring the real issue. Our police departments don’t need to be reformed – as evidenced by the fact that Officer Darren Wilson was acquitted of any wrong-doing and even Holder’s DOJ couldn’t find grounds on which to indict him. However, some populations today have a glaringly obvious and open contempt for authority and place no value on life or property. This population is what needs to be fixed, not the police departments trying desperately to deal with it. That makes the Interim Report complete and total bullshit except in use as liberal propaganda.

‘Implementation’…..

7.1 RECOMMENDATION: The President should direct all federal law enforcement agencies to review the recommendations made by the Task Force on 21st Century Policing and, to the extent practicable, to adopt those that can be implemented at the federal level.

Federal law enforcement agencies? Most of the recommendations in this report were aimed at local law enforcement agencies…so does that mean that local is soon to be federal?

7.2 RECOMMENDATION: The U.S. Department of Justice should explore public-private partnership opportunities, starting by convening a meeting with local, regional, and national foundations to discuss the proposals for reform described in this report and seeking their engagement and support in advancing implementation of these recommendations.

I wonder if this would be done in much the same way that Pearson was used to implement Common Core into the education system. For those of you who may not have done the research, Pearson develops the curriculum and the tests that are now “mandatory” in public schools. If you look at Pearson’s political donations over the last several years, you’ll find that the Democratic Party and individual Democratic party members have received sizable sums of money from Pearson and its employees.

7.3 RECOMMENDATION: The U.S. Department of Justice should charge its Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office) with assisting the law enforcement field in addressing current and future challenges.

Translation: We don’t like how law enforcement is being handled at the local level so the federal government is going to help…or takeover.

In support of this translation, look at some of the bullet items listed underneath Recommendation 7.3….

• Create a National Policing Practices and Accountability Division within the COPS Office.
• Establish national benchmarks and best practices for federal, state, local, and tribal police departments.
• Provide technical assistance and funding to national, state, local, and tribal accreditation bodies that evaluate policing practices.
• Provide technical assistance and funding to state training boards to help them meet national benchmarks and best practices in training methodologies and content.
• Prioritize grant funding to departments meeting benchmarks.
• Support departments through an expansion of the COPS Office Collaborative Reform Initiative.
• Work with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to ensure that community policing tactics in state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies are incorporated into their role in homeland security.

Create a national policing division….establish national standards…..prioritize grant funding to departments that comply with national standards…..support departments through expansion of government reform….incorporate homeland security into local law enforcement. Folks, if you were reading this without any other context you would think that you were reading a report about Nazi Germany. Speaking of which…..

About the time I hit “pillar” five I was beginning to wonder if the path that Obama has put us on with our police departments is in any way similar to the path that the Nazis took in gaining control over Germany. It’s common knowledge to anyone who has studied history that the Nazi party was welcomed in on their foundation of “change” since the country’s job markets and economy had been in such dire straits for so long. I began doing research – using only reputable sources, of course. I was a little hesitant at first because I’m as tired as the Democrats are of hearing the “Obama is another Hitler” rhetoric. I didn’t want to add to that, but at the same time I was desperate to know whether history is in the process of repeating itself.

Let the history lesson begin….

Germany in 1914 may as well have been the United States of two decades ago. Germany had a gold-backed currency; was expanding their world leadership in optics, chemicals, and machinery; and the German Mark was equal in value to the British shilling, the French franc, and the Italian lira (c). In 1919, after a brutal defeat in WWI, Germany was forced to make reparations following the signing of the Versailles Treaty. These reparations, coupled with the collapse of Germany’s over inflated economy, resulted in disaster for many German citizens. By 1923 Germany’s economy had crashed such that the previous ratio of four or five Marks to each American dollar became one trillion Marks to each American dollar. Does this over-inflation followed by a catastrophic crash sound familiar? Like maybe the housing market crash in 2012? The similarities don’t end there. Read this paragraph from PBS and tell me if this doesn’t sound like you…or most of America.

Ordinary citizens worked at their jobs, sent their children to school and worried about their grades, maneuvered for promotions and rejoiced when they got them, and generally expected things to get better. But the prices that had doubled from 1914 to 1919 doubled again during just five months in 1922. Milk went from 7 Marks per liter to 16; beer from 5.6 to 18. There were complaints about the high cost of living. Professors and civil servants complained of getting squeezed. Factory workers pressed for wage increases. An underground economy developed, aided by a desire to beat the tax collector.

Have many Americans not already done this by taking jobs that pay “under the table”? Or scouring every IRS law to find the loophole that will let them out of paying taxes? Back to the history lesson…

As a result of the very unstable state of the nation, a new political party was founded in 1918 – the German Worker’s Party (d). The platform of the German Worker’s Party was very simple – build a strong nationalist, pro-military, party made up of working class people (e). The party was contemptuous of democracy and stressed racial theories. This political view very closely matched Hitler’s, so Hitler joined. In 1920 the party changed its name to the National Socialists German Worker’s Party (d).

Okay, is this party starting to sound like another political party we’re familiar with? It’s nationalistic in that it thinks it’s better than other parties and other governments. It’s contemptuous of democracy and has violated our country’s Constitution repeatedly – even flaunting their disregard of it in news stories (like when Obama said he did not need Congressional approval to declare war). And it stresses racial theories. Yes, it may claim that it wants equal rights for all races, but it’s fighting for rights of one specific race by taking them away from another. It creates bias and prejudice where there is none except on the part of the very party that is crying victim. That is why the Task Force was established and why this Interim Report was published….even though the Officer that was supposedly racist was cleared of any wrong-doing. Explain that one.

So, at this point we have an apples-to-apples comparison. Germany’s National Socialist Party (aka Nazi Party) = USA’s Democratic Party. Where did Germany go with the Nazis?

In 1921, the Nazi Party formed the SA (Sturm Abteilung), also known as Stormtroopers (i). These Stormtroopers were recognized as the party militia. In essence, these were community groups who were responsible for carrying out the government’s orders in a strong-arm fashion. They also doubled as spies and turned in anyone not loyal to the Nazi party. Let’s see if Encyclopedia Brittanica’s (j) description of the SA jogs any memories of recent events.

SA men protected Party meetings, marched in Nazi rallies, and physically assaulted political opponents

Let’s see…..sound anything like…oh, I don’t know…maybe….the New Black Panther Party?!

The Southern Poverty Law Center (k) describes the New Black Panther Party as:

The New Black Panther Party is a virulently racist and anti-Semitic organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews and law enforcement officers. Founded in Dallas, the group today is especially active on the East Coast, from Boston to Jacksonville, Fla. The group portrays itself as a militant, modern-day expression of the black power movement

In all fairness, the Black Panthers of the ’60s have denounced the new group and recognize them for the hate-baiters that they are. Still though, does this or does this not sound like Hitler’s SA? And the New Black Panther Party isn’t working alone….in 2008 a voter intimidation case was brought against them for intimidating voters outside of a Philadelphia voting precinct (l). Guess what happened to the case against the Black Panthers? It was thrown out. By who? Eric Holder. Since then, we’ve had race-baiters such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and – of course – Eric Holder take center stage. These individuals decry the loss of a black life – even if it was the black’s fault – but stay frighteningly silent when the life lost belonged to a white person. Eric Holder himself helped incite the riots of Ferguson by undermining the decision of the Ferguson courts and launching a federal investigation into Officer Wilson’s behavior. It goes one step beyond that though. The White House, i.e. Obama, sent government representatives to attend Michael Brown’s funeral (m) but failed to send anyone to Major General Harold Greene’s funeral (n). Greene and 15 others were ambushed outside of Kabul….he was the highest ranking military officer to have been lost in combat since Vietnam and not a word from the White House. Considering the topic, it should be noted that Michael Brown was black and Maj. Gen. Greene was white. Go figure.

The other frightening thing to consider is a theme that was repeated frequently in the Interim Report that spawned these blog posts. In each “pillar” it talks about the need to get the community involved in policing efforts. Now, on the surface, this sounds great and I even commented in one of my blog posts that it was a good idea. But then I got to thinking….what if Obama enacted laws that violate my beliefs? What if he took over and made the country totalitarian and I spoke out against him? At that point, my neighbor, the cashier at the grocery store, or even you reading this blog could report me to the authorities and have me arrested. Increased law enforcement is great when the law is fair, but what about when it isn’t? And this president has a track record of not being fair.

So…where are we? Let’s see….Nazis = Democrats. SA/SS = New Black Panther Party/”black power” public figures. Got it. Moving on.

In 1923 Hitler led a revolt that failed and it damaged the Nazi Party’s image greatly (d). He and other Nazi Party leaders were arrested and imprisoned for treason. Hitler was sentenced to five years but was released after 10 months (i). By 1932, the Nazi Party was the biggest political party in Germany. I’m going to stop here for a moment because I’d like to draw a connection between a current event and this piece of history. In a speech last week at a town hall event in Cleveland, Obama said that he would endorse making voting mandatory (f). According to Gallup polls, the Democratic Party is traditionally the larger of the two parties in the country (g). However, it took a big hit in the November elections primarily – according to the Democrats – due to lack of voter turnout. If voting became mandatory – according to Obama – “it would completely change the political map in this country” (f). Check out what else Obama said (q):

“The people who tend not to vote are young, they’re lower income, they’re skewed more heavily towards immigrant groups and minority groups,” Obama said. “They are often the folks who are scratching and climbing to get into the middle-class. They’re working hard.” “There’s a reason why some folks try to keep them away from the polls,” Obama added. He said that making voting compulsory would be a short-term solution. “Long-term I think it would be fun to have a constitutional amendment process about how our financial system works,” he said.

“Fun” and “constitutional” should never be used in the same sentence with one another, especially by someone as lawless as this man.

Democrats prey on voter ignorance. Rather than educate the public about issues, they would prefer to simply tell them how to vote. Congresswoman Corrine Brown of Florida is a great example of this “teach them and they’ll vote for you once; feed them and they’ll vote for you forever” mentality. Congresswoman Brown has made headlines in the past by offering free meals to early voters (o). Now she’s making headlines for handing out mock ballots that tell people how to vote (p). Just like the Nazis. And why would the people vote for anybody else if there’s no one else to vote for?

Hitler became chancellor of the Nazi party in 1933, and the other political parties either dissolved or were suppressed into nonexistence (f). Again, sound familiar? The Tea Party and Constitutional Republicans have been trying to fight the Democrats since Obama came onto the scene and all have been suppressed, though not as successfully as the Democrats would like. Evidence of support for the nation’s Constitution can be seen in Overpasses for America events, Tea Party rallies, the Million Vet March on the Memorials, and a plethora of individual efforts (such as this blog) to spread the truth about the dirty leadership of the Democratic government. Apples-to-apples.

In April of 1933, Hitler introduced the Gestapo, or Nazi secret police, and took over local governments (i). Hmmm….in April 2015 Obama initiated a pilot program of federalizing six police departments (t). More apples-to-apples.

Many things happened in 1933 that set Germany up for Hitler to take control. Some of these things haven’t happened yet for us, but some have. In 1933, trade unions were banned (i). Any political party except the Nazis were banned (i). Germany withdrew from the League of Nations (i). Any media that was “un-German” was banned (i). The “un-German” media is frightening because this is one executive order away from happening now that the FCC controls all forms of media except book publishing.

When Germany’s President Paul von Hindenburg died in 1934 Hitler quickly stepped in and made Germany a totalitarian state with himself as the leader (f). The Nazi party held a vote and overwhelmingly declared Hitler as sole leader of the entire country. This is exactly the kind of take-over that most ‘aware’ citizens are fearing might be coming. The Democratic Party has already shown their unwillingness to work with Republicans and Obama personally has vetoed every bill that has made it to his desk since the Republicans took the majority. He vetoes bills that the American people want passed and then uses executive order to do what he wants. He uses any means necessary to get his way, even if it means lying to a federal judge (h). His actions are those of someone who believes himself to be above the law. That’s a very dangerous mindset to have.

Most people know the history that follows from this point. Hitler’s government cracked down on the rights of anyone not German and eventually 11 million Jews, Christians, Polish citizens, and other nationalities who were unlucky enough to fall within his grasp were murdered (r). It boggles the mind to think that such an atrocity could happen here and our gut reaction is to say that the American people would never be blind enough to let that happen. However, many Germans didn’t know about the atrocities being carried out by their own government in their own country (s).

To prevent non-Jews from attempting to enter the ghettos and from seeing the condition of daily life there for themselves, German authorities posted quarantine signs at the entrances, warning of the danger of contagious disease. Since inadequate sanitation and water supplies coupled with starvation rations quickly undermined the health of the Jews in the ghettos, these warnings became a self-fulfilling prophecy, as typhus and other infectious diseases ravaged ghetto populations. Subsequent Nazi propaganda utilized these man-made epidemics to justify isolating the “filthy” Jews from the larger population.

Remember that the next time you hear a story about a FEMA camp being setup in a mock exercise to control some highly contagious disease from further outbreak.

The bottom line to all of this is that we currently have a government out of control and it is a danger to the citizens of this great country. If you have trouble coming to terms with this then ask yourself this: what would the government have to take over in order to control the people? Now, answer that question.

Education – Common Core.

Media – FCC.

Public health/ Medical care – Obamacare.

Police/public law – ObamaLaw/COPS (Community Oriented Policing Services)

What more does he need to take over before we no longer have the ability to fight back? I didn’t write this to create or spread propaganda. I wrote this to try to bring more people to see the truth. And I hope I’ve succeeded. Please…I urge you. Trust nothing that comes out of D.C. Do your own research. And help spread the truth.

Thanks for reading.

(a) http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/Interim_TF_Report.pdf

(b)  https://realizationsruminationsandlife.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/obamalaw-coming-to-a-police-department-near-you-part-one/

https://realizationsruminationsandlife.wordpress.com/2015/03/04/obamalaw-coming-to-a-police-department-near-you-part-two/

https://realizationsruminationsandlife.wordpress.com/2015/03/08/obamalaw-coming-to-a-police-department-near-you-part-three/

https://realizationsruminationsandlife.wordpress.com/2015/03/13/obamalaw-coming-to-a-police-department-near-you-part-four/

https://realizationsruminationsandlife.wordpress.com/2015/03/18/obamalaw-coming-to-a-police-department-near-you-part-5/

https://realizationsruminationsandlife.wordpress.com/2015/03/20/obamalaw-coming-to-a-police-department-near-you-part-6/

(c) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/ess_germanhyperinflation.html

(d) http://history.howstuffworks.com/world-war-ii/national-socialist-german-workers-party.htm

(e) http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/joins.htm

(f) http://allenwestrepublic.com/2015/03/18/obama-calls-for-mandatory-voting-in-u-s/

(g) http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

(h) http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/5/obama-lawyers-misled-federal-judge-in-amnesty-case/?page=all

(i) http://www.historyonthenet.com/chronology/timelinenazigermany.htm

(j) http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/514736/SA

(k) http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/new-black-panther-party

(l) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/14/AR2010071405880.html

(m) http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/08/25/obama-sending-white-house-aides-to-attend-michael-browns-funeral/

(n) http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2014/08/06/obamas-silence-on-death-of-maj-gen-harold-greene-comes-under-fire/

(o) http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-11-01/story/brown-campaign-offers-free-meals-early-voters

(p) http://www.wokv.com/news/news/local/pastor-blames-quick-picks-early-voting-brawl/nkSb6/

(q) http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/19/obama-says-he-would-like-to-make-voting-mandatory-video/

(r) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/NonJewishVictims.html

(s) http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007822

(t) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/12/six-cities-racial-bias-pilot-program_n_6859160.html

ObamaLaw – Coming to a police department near you! – Part 5

I almost didn’t finish this blog series about the President’sTask Force on 21st Century Policing’s Interim Report (a) after the news broke about the six cities that would be testing grounds for federalized police departments (b). Reading that news made me sick to my stomach because it made one thing glaringly obvious – this was his plan all along and this report was nothing more than a way to ease the public into accepting it in much the same way an experienced player would ease their virgin mate into sex. Oddly enough they both have the same goal and the same result, too – we’re getting screwed!

Still, there is something to be said for knowing your enemy and I believe there may be useful nuggets in this report of what we need to be on the lookout for, what to expect. So….on with “pillar” five – Training & Education. Unfortunately, I didn’t make it past the second sentence before having to stop and shake my head at the bitter irony.

Today’s line officers and leaders must meet a wide variety of challenges including international terrorism, evolving technologies, rising immigration, changing laws, new cultural mores, and a growing mental health crisis.

Let’s see….

International terrorism….wouldn’t be much of an issue if we had a real man in the Office instead of someone who is either somebody’s bitch or the biggest wuss in history. Not sure which one he is, maybe both.

Evolving technologies….could be useful if not abused like the federal government’s use of wiretapping technology.

Rising immigration…..refer to comment above about international terrorism.

Changing laws….wouldn’t be an issue if the federal government would stop infringing on the rights of the States.

New cultural mores……refer to comment above about rising immigration. People should be coming to America to be a part of our culture, not coming to America and then demanding that we change our culture for them. Being aware of different cultures is important, as well as knowing the finer nuances of them, but the law is the law and every culture should have to obey the law equally. Applying the law according to different cultures opens the door for things like Sharia Law…where domestic battery and pedophilia are perfectly allowable since it’s all “part of their culture”. Okay, that may fly where you come from but here in America if I see you beating a woman or molesting a child I’m going to exercise my legal and Constitutional rights to subdue you by any means necessary (lethal or otherwise).

Growing mental health crisis….as a social worker, this one hits close to home. Mental health needs are on the rise, that cannot be argued. However, if you look at why these rates are on the rise you have to wonder if the federal government hasn’t brought this one on itself also – kids are being placed on ADHD meds at an alarming rate because they don’t get recess so they can study more for Common Core exams; many companies are cutting employees’ health benefits as a result of Obamacare; the sagging economy combined with the skyrocketing cost of medical care means many people can’t afford therapy and/or expensive medications; and – my favorite – the deinstitutionalization of psychiatric care that was commissioned by LBJ and the Democratic Congress in 1963. Many people with long-term mental illness don’t have family that are willing or able to care for them so, without long-term mental health facilities to rely on, they end up unable to socially function, homeless, and at risk of becoming the next leading news story as the culprit behind the latest shooting spree.

Grrrr…..moving on. I was able to get past a few paragraphs before something caught my eye.

Many who spoke before the task force recommended that law enforcement partner with academic institutions; organizations such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA), the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE), and the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF); and other sources of appropriate training. Establishing fellowships and exchange programs with other agencies was also suggested.

Funny….there isn’t a National Organization of WHITE Law Enforcement Executives. This is another great example of the pot calling the kettle black – no pun or racist connotation intended.

The need for understanding, tolerance, and sensitivity to African Americans, Latinos, recent immigrants, Muslims, and the LGBTQ community was discussed at length at the listening session, with witnesses giving examples of unacceptable behavior in law enforcement’s dealings with all of these groups. Participants also discussed the need to move towards practices that respect all members of the community equally and away from policing tactics that can unintentionally lead to excessive enforcement against minorities.

I want to point out something absolutely critical about the above statement. Look at the populations mentioned. Do you see ‘Asian’? How about ‘Indian’? ‘Russian’? ‘Italian’? ‘Native American’?’Israeli’? I didn’t see any of these nationalities listed. Did you see ‘military’? ‘Catholic’? ‘Mormon’? ‘Buddhist’? ‘Atheist’? ‘Deaf’? Hmmm….I didn’t either. Each one of these is a unique nationality and a unique culture, yet they’re not listed. Why not? Because these nationalities and these cultures are, by and large, respectful of America and of police authority. The populations listed in the report are being disrespectful and are demanding that our nation change for them – even though they’re a minority. Everyone else is willing, happy even, to come here and adopt our culture versus the other way around. Respect is a two-way street – you have to give it to get it and when those populations start giving it then they’ll start receiving it. Need an example of what this looks like? Ben Carson. Raised by a single mom in an impoverished neighborhood. He nor his mother demanded that the country take care of them because they had it rougher than others. Instead, Ben’s mom taught him that he could change his situation through education and hard work. Today he’s a leading pediatric neurosurgeon. And he’s black. And, yes, I’d vote for him in a heartbeat if he ran for POTUS.

5.1 RECOMMENDATION: The Federal Government should support the development of partnerships with training facilities across the country to promote consistent standards for high quality training and establish training innovation hubs. A starting point for changing the culture of policing is to change the culture of training academies. The designation of certain training academies as federally supported regional “training innovation hubs” could act as leverage points for changing training culture while taking into consideration regional variations. Federal funding would be a powerful incentive to these designated academies to conduct the necessary research to develop and implement the highest quality curricula focused on the needs of 21st century American policing, along with cutting edge delivery modalities.

Let me translate this for you: The Federal Government should take over training facilities so that we can dictate what police officers are taught. Let me tell you something else, too – a little counseling trivia. In providing therapy, social workers and counselors are taught to look out for little catch phrases that the client may use when the truth is going to make them sound or look bad. It’s a way of preserving their image both with themselves and with their therapist. I’ve already spotted several “catch phrases” throughout this document. “Development of partnerships” = taking over by federal government. “Federal funding as incentive” = do it the fed’s way or we withhold federal funding. Federal incentives were used to get states to adopt Common Core. When several states refused to adopt the educational standards the federal government withheld federal education funding unless they did. It’s mafia-style extortion, plain and simple. “21st century American policing” = policing according to the needs/wants of the federal government, regardless of what the American people want….i.e. federal police state (aka Fascism). Anyone who has any common sense should be scared witless by this.

5.3.1 ACTION ITEM: Recognizing that strong, capable leadership is required to create cultural transformation, the U.S. Department of Justice should invest in developing learning goals and model curricula/training for each level of leadership.

Cultural transformation? Why do we need a ‘cultural transformatin’? You don’t go into someone’s home and have them redecorate according to your tastes. In that same manner, you don’t go into a different country or live a different lifestyle and demand that everyone else cater to you. More importantly, though, did you notice the part about the US DOJ should invest in developing model curricula? Let me translate that one for you – the DOJ determines what the police officers are taught.

5.5 RECOMMENDATION: The U.S. Department of Justice should instruct the Federal Bureau of Investigation to modify the curriculum of the National Academy at Quantico to include prominent coverage of the topical areas addressed in this report. In addition, the COPS Office and the Office of Justice Programs should work with law enforcement professional organizations to encourage modification of their curricula in a similar fashion.

HOLY CRAP! How do you expect an organization that protects the country against terrorism to be able to do their jobs if they can’t use profiling? If the DOJ dictates the FBI’s training based on the content of this report, then the FBI would no longer be able to use race, ethnicity, or gender in any of their discriminating efforts to help protect against terrorism. And it won’t stop there. Soon it will be “discriminating” to label someone as a sexual predator and the sex offender database goes away. And neighborhood sex offenders won’t be first on the list when the FBI are searching for a missing child. And people will have no way of knowing whether the person they’re living next to is a great babysitter or a criminal monster. Sex offenders are already crying discrimination…..this would play right into their hands. And at that point God help our children because the police sure as hell won’t be able to.

5.9.2 ACTION ITEM: Law enforcement agencies should implement training for officers that covers policies for interactions with the LGBTQ population, including issues such as determining gender identity for arrest placement, the Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities, and immigrant or non-English speaking groups, as well as reinforcing policies for the prevention of sexual misconduct and harassment.

Determining gender identity for arrest placement? So, let me get this straight….if you arrest a guy who claims he’s gay you are then forced – by rule – to place him in a holding cell with women. And the next thing you know you have several lawsuits being filed by women who were raped. This has “bad idea” written all over it. If they’re physically male, you place them with other males. If they’re physically female, you place them with other females. Same goes for public restrooms. Or you can go to PC extremes and let the LGBT community have their own jails/prisons. Oh wait…that would be prejudiced. Never mind. And again, why should the police be forced to interact any differently with these populations? This goes back to what I was saying earlier about it opening the door to bad things like Sharia Law. I’ll give you an example. Police are called out to a domestic dispute at a house in a known Islamic neighborhood. If the police were to observe the cultural norms of the Muslim faith, they would go to the home and speak to the man. Only the man. Because in Muslim culture women are property, not people. And without being able to speak to the woman the police would never know that her husband beats her repeatedly, or that he has multiple wives by allowance of the local Muslim cleric and the latest is a child bride that he rapes repeatedly. And don’t say that this would never happen. I was once a social worker at a hospital where several of my patients were Muslim women. I was told in training not to address the woman but instead to address the man that accompanied her, since it is their custom that he speaks for her. Muslim women don’t even have the right to determine their own medical care, or the confidentiality of a doctor-patient relationship. That being said, I do have to admit one thing….every Muslim woman that I saw was older and the accompanying individuals were always sons. Almost every son was also accompanied by a sister as well as his wife and – to be totally honest – they were always very respectful of their mother. Most seemed genuinely concerned about the woman’s health and well-being. I would like to think that this is a cultural norm for them, but I’ve seen the statistics that state otherwise. In Islam the woman has no voice and no rights except those given to her by her husband. If he’s good, then she’s lucky and she is very well taken care of. If he isn’t a nice guy, her life will read like the horror stories from the history of African slaves.

5.13.2 ACTION ITEM: The U.S. Department of Justice should provide funding to incentivize agencies to update their Field Training Programs in accordance with the new standards.

Remember what I said earlier about “catch phrases”? “Incentivize agencies to update their Field Training Programs in accordance with the new standards.” Translation: Adopt our training standards or lose federal funding. (just like Common Core!)

That wraps up “pillar” five. Stay tuned tomorrow for my analysis of “pillar” six, “Officer Wellness & Safety”.

(a) http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/Interim_TF_Report.pdf

(b) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/12/six-cities-racial-bias-pilot-program_n_6859160.html

ObamaLaw – Coming to a police department near you! – Part Four

In this post I’ll carry on my analysis of the Interim Report released by the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing (a). To refresh your memory, or if this is the first you’re reading about it, Obama created a Task Force – by executive order – in December of 2014 to “identify best practices and make recommendations to the President on how policing practices can promote effective crime reduction while building public trust and examine, among other issues, how to foster strong, collaborative relationships between local law enforcement and the communities they protect” (b). So far, based on everything that I’ve read in the report and about the people putting the report together, the whole purpose of this is to ferret out racism and remove it while increasing “diversity” among police.

In this post we’re going to move on to “Pillar” Four of the report, Community Policing & Crime Reduction. If this is the first time you’re reading about this I urge you to start at the beginning – ObamaLaw – Coming to a police department near you! – Part One. You may also find it very enlightening to read about the individuals on this Task Force. A couple of them are decent individuals but some of them are downright scary. You can read about them here.

I was hoping that this “pillar” would be quick and simple like the last couple were, but I didn’t make it past the second paragraph before something was bugging me. Check out this paragraph and then see if you reach the same logical conclusion I did:

Over the past few decades, rates of both violent and property crime have dropped dramatically across the United States.However, some communities and segments of the population have not benefited from the decrease as much as others, and some not at all. Though law enforcement must concentrate their efforts in these neighborhoods to maintain public safety, sometimes those specific efforts arouse resentment in the neighborhoods the police are striving to protect.

Translation: Crime has come down in white communities but not black communities, therefore we’re having to put more cops in those black communities. Most of the cops are white and the black community doesn’t trust them so anytime somebody gets shot by the police the community riots – even if the person shot was guilty of the crime for which he or she was shot. Sound about right? If not, you may want to go back and re-read it. If so, I want you to follow me to the logical conclusion that made me stop here.

The writers of this report are saying that crime is not coming down in certain communities. As a result, cops are having to focus their efforts there and this is causing resentment. Okay, where did we have issues that led to the need for this Task Force? Ferguson. What is Ferguson? A town with a large black community. So we can deduce then that the resentment is coming from black communities. Why is there resentment? Because more cops are focusing their attention there. Why are more cops focusing their attention there? Because statistics indicate the crime rates are not dropping in these neighborhoods. Wait. Do you mean that police are focusing their attention on blacks because crime rates aren’t dropping there?! So….isn’t that racial profiling? No, wait, it’s not profiling because statistics show that crime rates are higher there. Well, statistics also show that blacks are arrested for committing crimes more than whites and they call that racial profiling. Hell, that’s the whole reason this Task Force was formed. So….what you’re really saying is that black communities have higher crime rates because blacks are committing more crimes? The very agency who is crying foul over “racial profiling” has just stated – in their own words and with studies cited to back them up – that racial profiling is NOT the reason there are more blacks than whites in jail and that whole argument can be put to bed. More than that, if and where racial profiling exists it is not keeping up with the crime rate. Wow, what a sobering thought. Keep this one in mind the next time you get into an argument with someone who claims you’re racist.

Moving on….

4.1 RECOMMENDATION: Law enforcement agencies should develop and adopt policies and strategies that reinforce the importance of community engagement in managing public safety. Community policing is not just about the relationship between individual officers and individual neighborhood residents. It is also about the relationship between law enforcement leaders and leaders of key institutions in a community, such as churches, businesses, and schools, supporting the community’s own process to define prevention and reach goals.

I don’t have a problem with this and think it’s a good idea, but I think it needs to be expanded on a bit. I think that one of the biggest obstacles to police officers engaging in the community is the fact that they never get out of their damn squad cars. How in the hell are we supposed to form a connection with somebody who is practically hooked up to the computer consoles in the cars? If police departments really want to engage the community they’ll reintroduce “beat cops” on foot. Yes, you read that correctly – cops who patrol on foot instead of in their squad cars – in addition to the cops who are patrolling in their squad cars so that there’s backup that can get to them quickly should they need it. I also think that initially these cops should be “shown the ropes” by a neighborhood ‘ambassador’, someone who is respected in the community and knows a lot of the people (like a pastor or respected elder). This way the community will be more accepting of the cops who are now on foot (viewed as less of a threat) and being introduced by someone the community trusts. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you engage a community – you meet them where they are, on their level, on their turf.

There are other action items and recommendations listed for “pillar” four. For the most part, they’re actually good ideas that could benefit all communities. However, I still think the bigger picture is being glossed over – you can engage the community all you want, the community can trust the cops as much as they want, but there will always be Trayvon Martins and Michael Browns until the youth of today are taught discipline, respect, and how to value life and property. Until these things are done, everything we do is just a band-aid.

(a) – http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/Interim_TF_Report.pdf

(b) – http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.asp?Item=2761

ObamaLaw – Coming to a police department near you! – Special: The people of the Task Force, Part 3

Yesterday I published Part Two of the series that looks into the people appointed to Obama’s President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. I have to admit that even I’m surprised at the type of people on this task force. I expected them to be on the liberal side, considering who chose them, but I didn’t expect someone that considers Thanksgiving to be racist, a different person who believes convicted sex offenders’ rights take precedent over public safety, and someone actively working to help illegal immigrants not be deported. These are some of the core issues that this country is struggling with and Obama has chosen people on the other side of the rope than us to help decide the future of our police departments. This doesn’t bode well for us if we let this continue.

Today I’m going to talk about the last four members of the Task Force.

Constance Rice, Appointee for Member, President’s Task Force on 21^st Century Policing
Constance Rice is a civil rights attorney and Co-Director of the Advancement Project, an organization she co-founded in 1999.  In 2003, Ms. Rice was selected to lead the Blue Ribbon Rampart Review Panel, which investigated the largest police corruption scandal in Los Angeles Police Department history.  In 1991, Ms. Rice joined the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and in 1996, she became Co-Director of the Los Angeles office.  She was previously an associate at Morrison & Foerster, and began her legal career as a law clerk to Judge Damon J. Keith of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.  Ms. Rice received a B.A. from Harvard College and a J.D. from New York University School of Law.

Already I see a few words that indicate this could be trouble….”advancement”, “NAACP”, and “Harvard”. If we look into the organization that Constance co-founded we see headlines on their website that verify our concerns (a). “Civil Rights Groups Stand in Solidarity with Young Activists in Ferguson” is one headline. “Diverse Coalition Support Our Petition Against Voter ID Law” is another. Or how about this one… “Civil Rights Organizations Stand with Arab and Muslim Communities”. That’s the organization’s website, but is that what Ms. Rice thinks? Here again Twitter comes to the rescue.

Ms. Rice tweeted this……

And re-tweeted this……     

While I believe that Ms. Rice’s intentions are good, I believe her actions may be misguided. I agree with Ms. Rice completely that all people – regardless of race, sex, or ethnicity – should have equal access to things such as jobs, health care, and education. However, Ms. Rice and other equal rights organizations are spending too much time applying band-aids than actually tackling the problem. For example, Ms. Rice complained about the laws requiring an ID to vote being discriminatory against low income individuals who don’t have government-issued IDs. Perhaps we wouldn’t need voter ID laws if we didn’t have over 10 million illegal immigrants trying to vote. Rather than complaining about the IDs being needed, why not come up with solutions that would help those low income individuals get their IDs, like maybe waiving the fees for any official documents…or providing transportation to go get the IDs. There are ways to make things equal without opening the door to those resources being abused.

Overall, I think Ms. Rice has the best of intentions, is intelligent and fair in her work, but is short-sighted in addressing societal issues. Look for her involvement in the Task Force to result in more band-aids and fewer cures.

Moving on.

Roberto Villaseñor, Appointee for Member, President’s Task Force on 21^st Century Policing

Roberto Villaseñor is Chief of Police for the Tucson Police Department (the TPD), a position he has held since 2009.   He joined the TPD in 1980, and has served as Officer, Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, and as Assistant Chief from 2000 to 2009.  Chief Villaseñor was named Officer of the Year for the TPD in 1996, and has been awarded the TPD Medal of Merit three times.  He also received the TPD Medal of Distinguished Service.  Chief Villaseñor is the incoming President of the Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police and a Board Member of the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF).  He received a B.S. from Park University and an M.Ed. from Northern Arizona University.

Villasenor has seen his fair share of controversy, although – unlike most of our other Task Force members – he was on defensive end and not the protesting end. He was Chief of Police when Gabbie Giffords was shot and dealt with the gun-rights unrest. He was also Chief of Police when Arizona’s SB1070 was put into place and he was forced to deal with the flashback from that. For the most part, Mr. Villasenor sounds like a great citizen and was a respected, well-liked police chief. The only concerns that I have with him is what he stated in a couple of interviews for the Tucson Sentinel:

Villaseñor, who calls himself an avid supporter of the Second Amendment, said it is time for a calm discussion about steps to reduce gun violence. Those include what he calls commonsense steps like banning high-capacity clips and assault rifles that are not used for leisure activities like target practice or hunting, he said. (b)

And…..

Tucson-area law enforcement officials added to the pile of briefs filed with the Supreme Court this week opposing Arizona’s SB 1070 illegal immigration law. Tucson Police Chief Roberto Villaseñor and Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik joined ex-state Attorneys General Grant Woods and Terry Goddard, along with U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva and dozens of others in asking the court to strike down the law.

First of all, anytime you mention a tracking system in the same sentence as guns I start to get a little uncomfortable. I’ve completed my concealed carry class, I’ve passed my background checks…..I should be able to own any damn gun I want without the government having to know what exactly I own and when I bought it. I also don’t feel as though – if I’ve passed all of the legal requirements to be able to carry a concealed weapon – the government has any right to determine what kind of clips I put in my guns, how many bullets they can handle, or anything else. I would also like to take this opportunity to mention that all of the guns used in the shooting sprees that has put this issue in the frying pan were obtained illegally. There is nothing the law could have done that would have prevented those shootings.

Second of all, I can understand Villasenor’s concern about the potential danger that his officers might face in the process of enforcing SB1070, but the very fact that it’s dangerous is exactly why it needed to be enforced. SB1070 was the bill that would have required Arizona officers to request proof of citizenship when stopping individuals that could potentially have been in the country illegally. I don’t see a problem with this and think that it should be nation-wide. The only time we wouldn’t need this is if the government made it so that illegals could not get drivers’ licenses. Then, the only time proof of citizenship would need to be shown is if they couldn’t provide a valid driver’s license. Of course, this is all moot since Villasenor announced in December 2014 that his officers will no longer be enforcing the law (d).

Moving on…..

Sean Smoot, Appointee for Member, President’s Task Force on 21^st Century Policing

Sean Smoot is currently Director and Chief Counsel for the Police Benevolent & Protective Association of Illinois (PB&PA) and the Police Benevolent Labor Committee (PBLC), positions he has held since 2000.  He began his career with PB&PA and PBLC as a Staff Attorney in 1995, before becoming Chief Counsel of both organizations in 1997.  Since 2001, Mr. Smoot has served as the Treasurer of the National Association of Police Organizations, and has served on the Advisory Committee for the National Law Enforcement Officers’ Rights Center since 1996.  From 2008 to 2009, he was a policy advisor to the Obama-Biden Transition Project on public safety and state and local police issues, and was a Member of the National Institute of Justice and Harvard Kennedy School of Government Executive Session on Policing and Public Safety from 2008 to 2011.  Mr. Smoot served as Police Commissioner of Leland Grove, Illinois from 1998 to 2008.  He received a B.S from Illinois State University and a J.D. from Southern Illinois University School of Law.

The results of my research into Sean Smoot thoroughly surprised me and gave me a glimmer of hope for the outcomes of this Task Force. According to Sean’s Facebook page, he’s patriotic and just as leery of big government as the rest of us. Here are just a few of the things that he’s posted on his personal Facebook page:

The thought of “big government” frightens him, he believes in the power of prayer, supports our police officers, honors our veterans, and believes that the good of the nation trumps the good of the politicians. There’s more that I didn’t post out of respect for his and his family’s privacy, but I can tell you that he celebrates Thanksgiving and wished everyone a Merry Christmas. That’s good enough for me. Sean may very well be the only real American on this Task Force. Let’s hope he stands his ground when the going gets tough.

Moving on…..

Cedric L. Alexander, Appointee for Member, President’s Task Force on 21^st Century Policing
Cedric L. Alexander is the Deputy Chief Operating Officer for Public Safety in DeKalb County, Georgia, a position he has held since late 2013.  Dr. Alexander is also the National President of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives.  In 2013, he served as Chief of Police for the DeKalb County Police Department.  Prior to this, Dr. Alexander served as Federal Security Director for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport from 2007 to 2013, and from 2006 to 2007, he was Deputy Commissioner of the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services.  From 2005 to 2006, Dr. Alexander was Chief of the Rochester Police Department (RPD) in Rochester, New York, where he previously served as Deputy Chief of Police from 2002 to 2005.  Before joining RPD, Dr. Alexander was a faculty member in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Rochester Medical Center from 1998 to 2002.  He began his career as a Deputy Sheriff in Florida from 1977 to 1981, before joining the Miami-Dade Police Department, where he was as an Officer and Detective from 1981 to 1992.  He received a B.A. and M.S. from St. Thomas University in Miami, Florida, and a Psy.D. from Wright State University.

Cedric posted a particular challenge for me because he’s a psychiatrist. As a social worker and therapist, that makes him a colleague. Of course, conservatives in social work are very very rare so I’ve become quite accustomed to disagreeing with most of my colleagues when it comes to politics. I found that Cedric wrote an opinion article for CNN after the Ferguson and Staten Island grand juries’ refusals to indict (e). While he made several excellent suggestions on improving police-community relationships, I found that he is doing the same thing as everyone else – applying band-aids instead of a cure. At this point I’m going to speak only about Ferguson and the Trayvon Martin case because – I’ll be brutally honest here – I don’t know enough about the Staten Island incident to be able to speak about it. By the time it happened I was burnt out on Ferguson (no pun intended) and avoiding any type of national news at all costs. However, it really irritates me to hear everyone going on about improving relationships between the cops and the community, eliminating biases and prejudice, and increasing the cultural diversity in police forces when NO ONE is addressing the behavior of the two young men that resulted in them being shot! In both the Ferguson and Trayvon Martin cases scientific evidence revealed that the young men were wrestling for the guns of the officers when they were shot. In the Ferguson case they even had people who gave evidence condemning the police officer recant their stories and admit they were lying! Eric Holder himself admitted last week that the “hands up, don’t shoot” quote was made up! How in the hell can you still claim that this is a racial problem when the only ones doing the damage are the ones crying foul?! I’m sorry, but both Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin got exactly what they deserved. Do I say that because they were black and the cops were white? Hell no! I say that because they were punk-ass thugs trying to take guns away from police officers – and probably would have shot the officers had they succeeded. I don’t care what color either party is or was – you have a thug trying to wrestle a gun away and a cop trying to defend himself….those are the only facts I need to know. Throwing in the race information doesn’t mean a damn thing, at least not to me. There is nothing – NOTHING – that could have changed the outcomes of those events except modifying the behavior of the youth. And I don’t mean just black youth. All youth these days have issues with respect and authority, and especially with respecting authority. Until that changes there will continue to be Trayvon Martins and Michael Browns. Every person who says this can be solved by diversifying the police and improving community relations is really only saying one thing: “The people wouldn’t have rioted if the cop had been black, so let’s bring in black cops so the people won’t riot next time.” Every member of the black community should be insulted and terrified because what this tells me is that they don’t care about finding a solution to the crimes, they merely want to stop the communities from disagreeing with police actions. And they will only do that if the cops are black. Ok…who’s racist now?

So there you have it – a psychologist, a few police chiefs, a researcher, an advocate….these are the people that make up the Task Force that Obama was put together to decide how best to overhaul the nation’s police departments. While I agree that some changes need to be made, I think this is another federal overreach and that this should be left up to the communities and states. Why? Because each community is different and a one-size-fits-all solution is simply not going to be universally applicable. If Obama ties federal funding to the overhaul, it will only spell disaster. At that point I would have to wonder if it’s ignorance or exceptional planning because if the police departments go bankrupt then the feds will contract out the work to whomever they want. Eric Holder has already alluded to this in his threat to dismantle the entire Ferguson police department. If the feds control the security contract then they have effectively put martial law into place – and done it in a way that most people will actually think the feds are doing them a favor. I really hate to keep comparing obama to Hitler because it’s so over-done, but that is exactly how the holocaust started….Hitler introduced laws for change and the people ate it up with a spoon. I see the same eagerness in the sheeple of this country and it scares the hell out of me.

Pay attention. Educate yourself. Don’t trust what the news tells you – do your own research. Argue with facts, not emotion – not only will it make you the winner but it really pisses off the liberals. Try to educate others with knowledge instead of opinion – don’t say “the country’s in danger because obama’s a douche-bag” (even if he is), say instead that the country is in danger because these facts contradict this bill and nobody is doing anything about it.  Maybe, hopefully, God-willing, we’ll be able to reclaim our country from the idiocy that has taken over her.

(a) – http://www.advancementproject.org/content/home

(b) – http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/012813_villasenor_white_house/tpd-chief-white-house-talk-gun-violence/

(c) – http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/033012_1070_briefs/villasenor-dupnik-join-flood-filing-anti-sb-1070-briefs/

(d) – http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2014/12/18/tucson-police-no-longer-enforcing-arizona-immigration-status-checks/

(e) http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/04/opinion/alexander-police-ferguson-staten-island/

ObamaLaw – Coming to a police department near you! – Special: The people of the Task Force, Part 2

Yesterday I told you about some of the members of the president’s executive order Task Force that is responsible for guiding the administration in overhauling America’s police departments. So far on the Task Force we have a known Constitutional rights violator (Ramsey), a prisoner rights advocate (Robinson), and an illegals-before-Americans advocate (Lopez). Let’s see what we can learn about four more of the Task Force members.

Bryan Stevenson, Appointee for Member, President’s Task Force on 21^st Century Policing
Bryan Stevenson is Founder and Executive Director of the Equal Justice Initiative (EJI), a private, non-profit organization headquartered in Montgomery, Alabama.  In addition to directing the EJI since 1989, he is a Clinical Professor at New York University School of Law.  He previously has served as a visiting professor of law at the University of Michigan School of Law. Mr. Stevenson has received the American Bar Association’s Wisdom Award for public service, the ACLU’s National Medal of Liberty, and the MacArthur Foundation “Genius” Award Prize. Mr. Stevenson received a B.A. from Eastern College (now Eastern University), a J.D. from Harvard Law School, and an M.P.P. from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. 

Equal Justice Initiative? I can see already where this is heading. And received an award from the ACLU? Can’t be good. One visit to EJI’s website confirms that this is another liberal organization, but this one goes one step further. You know all those laws we fought so hard to get put into place to protect children from sex offenders? You know, can’t live close to schools, parks, or day cares….have to register your residence…..all that good stuff that we use to try to keep our kids safe. Well, this guy wants to do away with it. This was taken from the EJI website(a):

Alabama also is home to some of the nation’s harshest sex offender registration and residency restrictions. Alabama’s Community Notification Act applies to everyone convicted of a sex offense, regardless of the nature of the offense. It bars people from living within 2000 feet of a college, school, or day care center. Many people have been left homeless or deprived of critical medical care because they cannot find homes that comply with the CNA. Indeed, people have been convicted of a felony offense and sentenced to 10 additional years in prison because they were unable to identify a CNA-compliant residential address prior to their release from prison.

I don’t care what else is out there about this guy, this one bit of info is all I need to know about him to know that he’s a scumbag. You don’t place the rights of a criminal over the safety of a child. EVER.  If you look around the website, you’ll also find that this individual implied that the “mass incarceration” of colored people today is the continuation of slavery and lack of civil rights. You know, in social work we look at behavior as a symptom and we strive to find the root cause of the behavior. It can be anything from an abusive family, lack of a role model, socioeconomic disparities, etc. These are the causes of the behavior, hence the behavior is merely a symptom. Nowhere, on any of these different websites, have I ever seen anyone suggest more than placing a band-aid on the problem. “African Americans are being arrested in droves, oh no! That means the justice system is racist and must be changed!” No! Change the morals and values of the people so that you have families versus “baby mamas” and “baby daddies”. Change the cultural perception from “I’m being oppressed by the man” to “life is hard but I can succeed if I try”. Change their view of the government from “you owe me because we were slaves” to “education is critical so that history doesn’t repeat itself”. Damn it! Nobody owes anybody anything in this country except what we owe to our veterans. This country started out with slaves. Guess what? THEY WERE WHITE! They came over on the Mayflower and were known as  “indentured servants”.

Let’s move on before I REALLY get on my soapbox.

Brittany Packnett, Appointee for Member, President’s Task Force on 21^st Century Policing
Brittany Packnett is currently Executive Director of Teach For America in St. Louis, Missouri, a position she has held since 2012.  From 2010 to 2012, she was a director on the Government Affairs Team at Teach for America.  Ms. Packnett was a Legislative Assistant for the United States House of Representatives from 2009 to 2010.  From 2007 to 2009, she was a third grade teacher in Southeast Washington, D.C., as a member of the Teach For America Corps.  Ms. Packnett has volunteered as Executive Director of Dream Girls DMV, a mentoring program for young girls, and was the founding co-chair of The Collective-DC, a regional organization for Teach For America alumni of color.  She currently serves on the boards of New City School, the COCA Associate Board, the Urban League of Metro St. Louis Education Committee, and the John Burroughs School Board Diversity Committee.  Ms. Packnett received a B.A. from Washington University in St. Louis and an M.A. from American University.

Fortunately for us, Ms. Packnett is on social media, which means that we can view her very own words to get an idea of her beliefs. Let’s see what her Twitter account says….

 Hmmm…..terms and conditions apply to be free. Interesting perspective. Let’s see what Ms. Packnett has re-tweeted from some of her followers…..

Racist traditions? Christopher Columbus Day is racist? What?! Sure she’s got to be joking.

Hmmm. Nope. Not only is she not joking, but she thinks that Thanksgiving is a racist tradition too. Enough said on this one. Moving on.

Susan Rahr, Appointee for Member, President’s Task Force on 21^st Century Policing

Susan Rahr is Executive Director of the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission, a position she has held since 2012.  From 2005 to 2012, she served as the first female Sheriff in King County, Washington.  Ms. Rahr spent over thirty years as a law enforcement officer, beginning as a patrol officer and undercover narcotics officer.  While serving with the King County Sheriff’s Office, she held various positions including serving as the commander of the Internal Investigations and Gang Units, commander of the Special Investigations Section, and Police Chief of Shoreline, Washington.  Ms. Rahr received a B.A. from Washington State University.

Sue is an interesting one because she was actually a sheriff. And she was well liked. Even more surprising, I like her. An article in The Business Journals sums up everything that I like about Sue. Here are a few excerpts from it (b):

When she stepped into the new role, Rahr was surprised to see how the atmosphere at the academy had become similar to a military boot camp. On a recruit’s first day, they would be screamed at and humiliated like soldiers in training. If a recruit was ever tardy, they were told to “drop and give me 50 push-ups.” And there was a military-style protocol requiring recruits to snap to attention if they ran into a higher-up in the hallway.

“They were so stressed out that they weren’t learning the material they needed to learn, so we moved away from military boot camp,” Rahr told me. “We’re not training them to be soldiers and followers. We are training them to make decisions and use judgment.”

To change this “counterproductive atmosphere,” Rahr said she removed a trophy case in the academy and replaced it with the U.S. Constitution.

She explained that oftentimes police officers believe the Constitution is something that gets in the way of the job. Rahr wants it to be something to uphold — their mission.

She doesn’t want her officers to be followers but instead wants them to make decisions and use judgment. She ditched the trophy case and replaced it with the Constitution. The Constitution! A document that our president claims to be a hindrance, this woman uses as a training device for her officers. “…oftentimes police officers believe the Constitution is something that gets in the way but she wants it to be upheld and to become their mission. I love this woman’s attitude and training ethics. I can’t wait to see how she gets along with her Task Force cohorts – especially the ones who feel that the convicted criminals’ rights are more important than public safety.

As much as I would love to talk about the breath of fresh air that Sue Rahr represents, we must move on.

Tracey Meares, Appointee for Member, President’s Task Force on 21^st Century Policing
Tracey Meares is the Walton Hale Hamilton Professor of Law at Yale Law School, a position she has held since 2007.  From 2009 to 2011, she also served as Deputy Dean of Yale Law School.  Before joining the faculty as Yale, she served as a professor at The University of Chicago Law School from 1995 to 2007.  She has served on the Committee on Law and Justice, a National Research Council Standing Committee of the National Academy of Sciences. She was appointed by Attorney General Holder to serve on the inaugural Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Science Advisory Board.  She also currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation.  Ms. Meares began her legal career as a law clerk for Judge Harlington Wood, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.  She later served as a trial attorney in the Antitrust Division at the Department of Justice.  Ms. Meares received a B.S. from the University of Illinois and a J.D. from The University of Chicago Law School.

Hmmmm…..first impression is that she’s another one of Holder’s stooges. However, researching her work I was impressed with both her literary skills and her reasoning abilities. She speaks clearly, is well-spoken, and has a good delivery in her reports. Definitely a scholar, and this gave me hope. I thought at first that my hopes were going to be dashed when she spoke of legitimacy as being a persons willingness to defer to a government authority because they feel that authority has the right to tell them what to do. She talked of how important this is and how it is the leading indicator of compliance with the law. My liberty-infringement indicator was threatening to go off, but then something occurred to me. She’s explaining why African Americans commit so many crimes – because they don’t feel that our government has the right to tell them what to do. And she’s right. I’ve worked with African American youth who have no respect whatsoever for a white teacher but will instantly fall in line with a black teacher. As a culture, they have become so sensitized to the race issue that if you’re not like them then you can’t be trusted and therefore don’t have the right to tell them what to do. She goes on to talk about how procedural justice is made up of 4 key factors – voice, decision fairness, treatment with dignity and respect, and trust. These factors determine how individuals will respond to authority figures. I highly recommend watching this video of her presentation on procedural justice (c). She doesn’t say that one side or the other did this wrong and therefore things need to change. She says this side acted this way because that side made them feel bag and this is how we can change this. It acknowledges the faults of both sides while also providing common sense solutions. I can’t fault that and without further research I can’t fault her either.

So, where are we now? Constitutional rights violator (Ramsey), a prisoner rights advocate (Robinson), an illegals-before-Americans advocate (Lopez), sex-offender rights over public safety advocate (Stevenson), an anti-American reverse-racism pro (Packnett), a Constitutional sheriff (Rahr), and a scholar (Meares).

Tomorrow I’ll be wrapping up research into the Task Force members and get back to my analysis of the Interim Report. I haven’t seen anything yet that in any way eases my concerns. As far as I can tell, you’ve got a panel of Obama-bots with a smattering of Conservatism sprinkled in so the administration can claim fairness. We still have much to be worried over. Like maybe the fact that this whole Task Force was created by executive order. Have you thought about why that was? Why not let it be recommended by a committee, or an agency? I can think of only one reason – because with an executive order Obama would have been able to hand-pick the members of the Task Force. That’s why it’s so important that we look at who they are and what they stand for – or against. Right now the majority of these people stand against traditional American values and ideals….the very things that made this country great. We can be great again, but not with an administration like the current one and task forces like this one.

(a) – http://www.eji.org/massincarceration

(b) – http://www.bizjournals.com/bizwomen/news/profiles-strategies/2014/08/with-the-debate-over-police-actions-in-ferguson.html?page=all

(c) – http://www.courtinnovation.org/research/procedural-justice-secret-ingredient-tracey-l-meares-community-justice-2014

ObamaLaw – Coming to a police department near you! – Part Three

Today we’re delving into the third “Pillar” of the DOJ’s  President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing Interim Report. If you’ve been following along, thanks for continuing to put up with sarcasm. If you’re just now joining in, you may want to consider reading Part One and Part Two to fully catch up to where we are.

“Pillar” Three of the interim report covers “Technology & Social Media”. As evidenced by the plethora of cyber attacks the government has suffered recently, this is obviously a topic that the government needs help with. Just today the CIA announced that it was branching out in to cyber security, to which many [intelligent] Americans said “about time!”.

The first part of “Pillar” Three talks about the pros and cons of police officers wearing BWCs (body-worn cameras). The report makes the obvious statements about the benefit of evidence and documenting the officer’s perspective, but ended with the concern that BWCs violate the public privacy. This is almost laughable coming from the same government that has subpoenaed usernames and passwords from web tech companies, has admitted to using illegal wiretapping on its civilion population as well as foreign dignitaries, has forced the government into private healthcare, uses the IRS as a prejudiced bully, and has most recently made a power-grab to take over the internet. And they’re worried about violating our privacy with a small camera that a police officer wears? What a joke! We have no privacy under this administration and any concern they have about privacy is merely a smokescreen for something they don’t want us to know. The only way we can try to see through this bluff is to answer the question of why it wouldn’t be a good idea for cops to wear BWCs. So, why wouldn’t it? Well, let’s see. It could dispel any false claims of violence should there be another Trayvon Martin incident or another Ferguson. That would be a good thing, though, right? So….why wouldn’t the government want cops wearing BWCs? It could provide evidence that a cop used excessive violence….no wait, that’s something they’re trying to document if/when it happens. Right? Or is it? The only time the government doesn’t want something recorded is when they know they’re doing something wrong and don’t want to get caught. It’s the same philosophy that prompted the Dems to request a private, closed-door meeting with Netanyahu prior to him addressing Congress and the same reason Hilary Clinton used her personal email during her stint as Sec of State. The Dems didn’t want the Reps to know the contents of the meeting with Netanyahu and Hilary didn’t want it on record that she committed murder by completely ignoring our Benghazi Embassy’s pleas for help, resulting in the deaths of four Americans. The government not wanting something documented or observed is the equivalent of your teenager asking to shut the door to their room when they have friends over – you know they’re up to no good. What kind of no good would the government be up to that they would be incriminated by BWCs?

I want you to take a moment and think back to what I said in the last blog post about when the police respond to protests. Remember the wording that was used to describe the response to a protest? It was implied to be a “military operation”. That’s dang close to martial law. If martial law were implemented by a president who has been known to target Conservatives would the government really want its actions documented? No. The only reason the government would shy away from the use of BWCs is if they didn’t want something recorded that would incriminate them. It has absolutely nothing to do with public privacy.

Getting into the recommendations and action alerts, let’s take a look at 3.1…..

3.1 RECOMMENDATION: The U.S. Department of Justice, in consultation with the law enforcement field, should broaden the efforts of the National Institute of Justice to establish national standards for the research and development of new technology. These standards should also address compatibility and interoperability needs both within law enforcement agencies and across agencies and jurisdictions and maintain civil and human rights protections.

The problem I have with this recommendation is the vast ambiguity of it. It is so vague that it could mean almost anything. For example, they want to “establish national standards for the research and development of new technology”. Ok, what technology? Are we talking about technology that would interfere with witnesses’ ability to record police confrontations with their cell phones? Or technology that would allow the police to eavesdrop on phone conversations, or maybe even track you with the GPS in your smartphone or car? There’s just too much room for them to ‘fill in the blanks’ later for me to be comfortable with this recommendation. This concern is multiplied exponentially if you look at the last sentence…..”…address compatibility and interoperability needs both within law enforcement agencies and across agencies and jurisdictions…”. This means that whatever technology is developed for the police, they want to be able to use it for the military, FBI, or any other agency/jurisdiction that the federal government thinks should be in on the action.

3.1.1 ACTION ITEM: The Federal Government should support the development and delivery of training to help law enforcement agencies learn, acquire, and implement technology tools and tactics that are consistent with the best practices of 21st century policing.

Just like the recommendation above, the vagueness of this is terrifying. What technology? What tactics? And what exactly are the “best practices” of 21st century policing? Once again there’s too much “loose wording” to make me comfortable with this.

3.1.2 ACTION ITEM: As part of national standards, the issue of technology’s impact on privacy concerns should be addressed in accordance with protections provided by constitutional law. Though all constitutional guidelines must be maintained in the performance of law enforcement duties, the legal framework (warrants, etc.) should continue to protect law enforcement access to data obtained from cell phones, social media, GPS, and other sources, allowing officers to detect, prevent, or respond to crime.

“…..the legal framework should continue to protect law enforcement access to data obtained from cell phones, social media, GPS, and other sources, allowing officers to detect, prevent, or respond to crime.” Uh huh. Cell phones? Social media? GPS? And what are “other sources”? The sad thing about all of this is that the danger comes not in application, but who it’s applied to. If this were applied to suspected criminals it would be great. But what about when it’s applied to people that haven’t committed a crime but that the government doesn’t like? Or – worse yet – what if disagreeing with the government becomes a crime? This is when this kind of thing becomes very, very dangerous. While I too am tired of hearing the obama regime compared to Hitler, it bears mentioning that Austria’s people welcomed Hitler’s agenda of “change” and thought he would turn the failing country around. We see what kind of change he brought with him.

3.2 RECOMMENDATION: The implementation of appropriate technology by law enforcement agencies should be designed considering local needs and aligned with national standards.

Here we go again with ‘national standards’. Folks, law enforcement is not a one-size-fits-all scenario. What works for one city may not work for another. You can’t force police work into a cookie-cutter mold designed by a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington. It’ll look great on paper and fail miserably in implementation….kind of like the national healthcare standards and, oh yes, let’s not forget the national education standards known as Common Core. Current evidence dictates that anytime you see something being conformed to “national standards” you may as well go ahead and accept sight unseen that it’s going to fail, but not before horrifically complicating our lives.

The report goes on to talk about how important it is to get the community’s feedback on any new technology, and that doing so will increase acceptance and positive response. It’s worth pointing out that no where does it say that community input would actually be used for anything except allowing community engagement and feedback, nor would the community have a say in which technology is used. In essence, we’re being spoon-fed medicine while being told that it’s candy so we’re more likely to swallow it. Aggravating, but not surprising. However, Recommendation 3.3 got my attention in a hurry.

3.3 RECOMMENDATION: The U.S. Department of Justice should develop best practices that can be adopted by state legislative bodies to govern the acquisition, use, retention, and dissemination of auditory, visual, and biometric data by law enforcement.

Some of us may instantly know what this is saying, but others may need it broken down for them to fully understand the fear that this statement should put in their hearts.

Acquisition, use, retention, and dissemination….this means that they can get it, use it, store it, and share it in any way they like. Auditory and visual data…..sound recordings and video. This could be anything from an intercepted cell phone conversation to video captured with a traffic camera. Here is the scary part….biometric data. According to Dictionary.com:

1. biometrics definition. The measuring and analysis of such physical attributes as facial features and voice or retinal scans. This technology can be used to define an individual’s unique identity, often for security purposes.

Again, this could be a good thing if you’re talking about tracking violent criminals. But what about if you’re tracking an every day citizen who has committed no crime? Think it won’t happen? Let me share something with you….

The task force that obama created by way of executive order is chaired by none other than Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey. You may or may not remember him from some prominent news stories he was involved in. Let me refresh your memory…..

In 2008, Charles Ramsey made The Washington Post when his department began doing safety stops and collecting demographic information on the drivers and occasionally even their passengers. This information was then put into a police database. These were people who had committed no crime nor were they suspected of having committed a crime. These were innocent individuals going about their daily business when they were stopped by the police and questioned. For what purpose? What useful information could possibly be garnered from innocent people going about their day-to-day business?

As if that info on Ramsey wasn’t bad enough let me ask you this – do you remember the Pershing Park arrests in 2002? Demonstrators had gathered in Pershing Park to protest the World Bank and International Monetary Fund meetings. On September 27, 2002, the police – under Ramsey’s orders – surrounded the park and arrested over 400 people. Many of the people arrested weren’t even protesters but were instead media and pedestrian traffic. The problem with the arrests was that the police had not warned anyone to disperse and had actually prohibited people from leaving the park. Following the arrests, the booking procedures of the detainees included such demeaning things as being told to “strip naked, bend over, and cough”. I strongly urge you to read the full article here for a complete description, including first-hand accounts, of the acts that Ramsey and his force committed. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled on January 13, 2006, that the arrests violated the Fourth Amendment rights of the individuals and that Ramsey could be held personally liable for the violations. Ramsey’s escapades cost the city officials of Washington one million dollars that was paid out to more than 120 of the protesters, not including, not including other settlements reached by the D.C. government (one settlement in excess of $640,000). None of this includes the $1.3 million in legal fees that was paid for Ramsey’s legal representation.

So, the same guy that is talking about collecting biometric data has already been caught and convicted of infringing on Constitutional rights and harassing law-abiding citizens. Is this someone we can trust? Absolutely not. By the way, as a result of the information that I found on Ramsey, I’ll be doing a special blog post tomorrow where I’ll research and discuss all of the members of the task force. So far I’m not impressed with obama’s choice of leadership here, though at least he’s consistent in choosing people with poor ethics.

Skipping on down….here’s one I’ve never heard of before.

3.7 RECOMMENDATION: The Federal Government should make the development and building of segregated radio spectrum and increased bandwidth by FirstNet for exclusive use by local, state, tribal, and federal public safety agencies a top priority.

So, let me get this straight, they’re wanting to create a secure internet just for the police to use….and we’re supposed to trust them to keep it secure. This is a joke, right? And I’m sure this has absolutely nothing to do with the government’s recent FCC rulings governing the internet. Open your eyes, America – we’re being played.

Here again is the link to the interim report so that you can read it for yourself and do your own research. Reminder – I’ll be doing a special blog post tomorrow about the people behind these recommendations. Please share this with others that can either use this information or that you feel need to be educated about the dangers of ObamaLaw.

ObamaLaw – Coming to a police department near you! – Part Two

In my previous blog post I talked about the Interim Report filed by Obama’s COPS program, specifically the President’sTask Force on 21st Century Policing. As described yesterday, the report is broken down into six “pillars” (yes, “pillars” like the “5 Pillars of Islam”). Yesterday I covered Pillar One, today we’re going to cover Pillar Two: Policy & Oversight. While reading the introduction to this section one statement stood out and I had to go back and re-read it. I tried to read past it again and I just couldn’t do it.

Members of the Division of Policing of the American Society of Criminology recently wrote, “While the United States presently employs a broad array of social and economic indicators in order to gauge the overall ‘health’ of the nation, it has a much more limited set of indicators concerning the behavior of the police and the quality of law enforcement.”

“The behavior of the police and the quality of law enforcement”……..

Maybe I’m wrong on this one, but it seems to me that before we start talking about criticizing the behavior of the police we should start looking at the behavior of the people they’re policing. Where does it cover that? Where does it talk about the teenagers that are so out of control that a mob – 900 strong – storm a movie theater?¹ Where does it mention dealing with people like the dad who threw his 5-year old daughter over the side of a bridge?² I think before the government starts putting the police under a microscope they should first look at the condition of society overall. Right now I can tell you that we have a generation of youth who are out of control, entire populations who think the rules don’t apply to them, the national perspective that you can’t criticize anyone who isn’t white because if you do you’re racist, and we’re not allowed to exercise our Constitutional rights if it hurts someone’s feelings. Oh – and my personal favorite – we’re being limited in our ability to defend ourselves with firearms while in this very report they’re also trying to restrict those who they claim are responsible for protecting us – bottom line here being that we’re left unprotected.

All of that being said, let’s try to move forward into Pillar Two of the report.

Reading through this section I will have to admit that there are several good ideas about improving police departments’ transparency to the community. Seeking the community’s feedback, making policy and procedure available to the public, and compiling more detailed crime data are all really positive things. I began to think that maybe this “pillar” wouldn’t be so bad, but then a simple matter of wording made me pause. Check out 2.7 Recommendation….

2.7 RECOMMENDATION: Law enforcement agencies should create policies and procedures for policing mass demonstrations that employ a continuum of managed tactical resources that are designed to minimize the appearance of a military operation and avoid using provocative tactics and equipment that undermine civilian trust.

Anyone who has been following the Obamacare debacle in the Supreme Court knows that wording matters. One wrong word, or one omitted word for that matter, can make the difference between a fact and an intention. So, with that in mind, let’s take a look – a very close look- at the wording that was chosen for this.

“…a continuum of managed tactical resources that are designed to minimize the appearance of a military operation……”. Minimize the appearance of a military operation. Folks, what this report has just implied, through the use of very specific wording, is that every time there is a mass demonstration it is responded to with a military operation, not police crowd control. Minimize the appearance. Avoid using provocative tactics and equipment. Translation: During a mass protest make it look like it’s just regular police out there instead of the military so we don’t further piss anybody off. Oh, and don’t pepper spray them because that makes us look bad when it shows up on YouTube.”

The action item that followed this recommendation almost made me laugh because it entirely supported my translation.

2.7.1. ACTION ITEM: Law enforcement agency policies should address procedures for implementing a layered response to mass demonstrations that prioritize de-escalation and a guardian mindset. These policies could include plans to minimize confrontation by using “soft look” uniforms, having officers remove riot gear as soon as practical, and maintaining open postures. “When officers line up in a military formation while wearing full protective gear, their visual appearance may have a dramatic influence on how the crowd perceives them and how the event ends.”

“….their visual appearance may have a dramatic influence on how the crowd perceives them and how the event ends.”  You think?! I hope the government didn’t spend too much of my tax money on this elementary school logic. Egad. Moving on…..

2.11 RECOMMENDATION: Law enforcement agencies should establish search and seizure procedures related to LGBTQ and transgender populations and adopt as policy the recommendation from the President’s HIV/AIDS Task Force to cease using the possession of condoms as the sole evidence of vice.

Okay, I had serious issues with this one. Why should the LGBTQ community need different search/seizure procedures? They’re so demanding of equal rights we should give them to them – apply the same procedures to them that would be applied to a heterosexual individual. Their sexual orientation should be irrelevant and singling it out like this only creates or increases bias. I have the same opinion about scholarship forms, job applications, anything like that. There shouldn’t be any place on any formal document that asks your age, gender, race, or sexual orientation. Just saying.

2.12 RECOMMENDATION: Law enforcement agencies should adopt and enforce policies prohibiting profiling and discrimination based on race, ethnicity, national origin, age, gender, gender identity/expression, sexual orientation, immigration status, disability, housing status, occupation, and/or language fluency.

Alright, I had serious issues with this one too. This one is going to make me sound hypocritical, but I promise I have a valid reason for my statement. I believe that police should be able to use profiling for the purposes of public safety if that profiling is supported by factual evidence. The TSA’s use of airport security is a great example of failed profiling. They have no problems patting down terrified children and strip-searching disabled individuals but wouldn’t stop a Middle Easterner if they had to because, oh no, that might be considered profiling! Who gives a rat’s ass if it’s profiling if it prevents another 9/11?! If a child goes missing should the police first search the convicted sexual offenders living in the area or would that be discriminatory? If you have a serial killer on the loose are you going to walk blindly into the investigation so that no one is profiled, or are you going to look at the characteristics of past serial killers to see if there’s a pattern? I think this is one of those “if the shoe fits” scenarios. If factual data dictates that this population is more often responsible for this action, then that’s the population you check first when that action has been committed. And don’t give me the argument that the population is being unfairly targeted. The police only make the arrest – a judge and jury are responsible for handing down a guilty verdict. To claim that there are more of a specific population incarcerated because of discrimination is stating that the police were discriminating, the judge was racist, and the jury of peers were all biased too. Sorry, but that dog don’t hunt. And don’t even get me started on the whole issue of immigration status. Every individual that is here illegally is a slap in the face of every legal emigrant.

2.14 RECOMMENDATION: The U.S. Department of Justice, through the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, should partner with the International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and Training (IADLEST) to expand its National Decertification Index to serve as the National Register of Decertified Officers with the goal of covering all agencies within the United States and its territories. The National Decertification Index is an aggregation of information that allows hiring agencies to identify officers who have had their license or certification revoked for misconduct. It was designed as an answer to the problem “wherein a police officer is discharged for improper conduct and loses his/her certification in that state . . . [only to relocate] to another state and hire on with another police department.”

Let’s talk about being hypocritical. I personally don’t have an issue with this recommendation. In fact, I think it’s a great idea. I also think it is grossly hypocritical being filed in the same report as the recommendation that immigration status be removed from the FBI criminal database (read yesterday’s blog for details if you haven’t already). If an illegal immigrant’s actions can’t follow them to another state then why should a cop’s? Don’t get me wrong – I think both of these populations should be nationally monitored. I’m just trying to point out how unfair and discriminating it is that the report says that one shouldn’t be monitored and the other one should. Either monitor them both or monitor neither because in my mind they’re both equally a threat to public safety.

Wrapping up…..”Pillar” Two was mercifully short compared to the first one. I learn fast and didn’t try to drink anything while reading the report this time. I’m still trying to clean the soda out of my computer from yesterday. This report still brings up grave concerns, though, about the federal over-reach into local law enforcement. The fact that this is all being done by a task force that was created through executive order makes me even more distrustful of it. As I said before, this administration only investigates something when it wants to take it over. The last thing we want is Big Brother breathing down the necks of our police officers. I think that the mere fact that Attorney General Eric Holder demanded federal investigations into both the Ferguson and Trayvon Martin incidents did more to worsen race relations in this nation than anything else. The message that he sent loud and clear is that our administration does not trust the police and did not trust the court system in their handling of the cases. When you consider that this administration is actively being investigated for the cover up of the deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi, the blatant refusal to act against ISIS, the snubbing of Israel, the illegal targeting and misuse of power by the IRS, the complete clustermuck that Obamacare has become, the Fast & Furious debacle, and the plethora of other Obama scandals it’s no wonder I’m more than a little suspicious of anything that comes from Obama’s pen and phone. And I hope you are too.

This country didn’t get stupid overnight….it took decades of people willing to be compliant little sheeple…of people who just didn’t want to “get political”….of people who didn’t think it involved them. Educate yourselves. Do your own research. Don’t buy into what the media spoon-feeds you or what the White House press secretary tells you to believe. It does involve you and you should “get political” because the very politics you don’t want to get into are going to determine how you live your life. Obama has a pen and a phone….you have a brain and a vote. Use yours more than he uses his and we may still be able to turn this country around.

To read the report for yourself, you can find it here at the DOJ’s COPS website. I’ll post Part Three tomorrow where I discuss “Pillar Three: Technology & Social Media”.

¹ Curfew implemented after nearly 900 teens storm movie theater – Ocoee, FL – reported by WKMG Local 6

² Judge appoints public defender for father accused of throwing child over bridge – St. Petersburg, FL – reported by the Orlando Sentinel

ObamaLaw – Coming to a police department near you! – Part One

This morning on my FB feed I saw an article claiming that Obama is trying to take over our state and local law enforcement – ObamaLaw they called it. Ever the diligent researcher, I decided to investigate this before I jumped to any conclusions. I started this blog in one browser window and pulled up my research in another. Based on what I’ve found we should all be afraid – very, very afraid.

On December 18th of last year (2014), as a direct result of the chaos in Ferguson, President Obama created by Executive Order the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Known as COPS (Community Oriented Policing Services), this task force “seeks to identify best practices and make recommendations to the President on how policing practices can promote effective crime reduction while building”. This week the task force released its Interim Report and made it available for view on the DOJ’s website.

The report is organized into six “pillars” (pillars? really?!? not at all related to the Five PIllars of Islam I’m sure <insert sarcastic eye roll here>) and those are followed by a section on implementation. The first pillar is “Building Trust & Legitimacy”. A lot of the suggestions in this section are actually great ideas. However, there are a couple of areas that I found to be somewhat concerning. On page 11 of the report there was this:

1.3.2 ACTION ITEM: When serious incidents occur, including those involving alleged police misconduct, agencies should communicate with citizens and the media swiftly, openly, and neutrally, respecting areas where the law requires confidentiality.

One way to promote neutrality is to ensure that agencies and their members do not release background information on involved parties. While a great deal of information is often publicly available, this information should not be proactively distributed by law enforcement.

Apparently, the government was extremely unhappy about the division that occurred not because a black teenager was shot, but because public opinion of him was swayed when the police released the video of the teenager committing a strong-armed robbery right before his run-in with the police that resulted in him being shot. The kid was a THUG but the government did not want the public to know that. Why not? Did they want us all to just sit around and think the cop was racist and had targeted the young man? That’s certainly what that action item implies. Considering the mayhem that ensued after it was plainly obvious that the kid got what he deserved, I would have to say that the police department probably released that video as a means of self defense for their other officers. If the lawless and true racists burn the city down after evidence shows the kids was in the wrong, what would have happened if everyone was under the assumption the kid was innocent?

Moving on down to page 15 there was a recommendation to an action item that was almost laughable.

1.6 RECOMMENDATION: Law enforcement agencies should consider the potential damage to public trust when implementing crime fighting strategies.

Let me get this straight….if there is a police officer being attacked, or if the police officer is trying to stop someone else being attacked, they are supposed to first think about whether their actions are going to impact the public’s opinion of him. Ummm…..no. The officer should use whatever force is necessary to insure their own safety as well as the safety of the innocents around them. Cops put themselves in the line of fire daily and the last thing they should have to worry about is public opinion.

At the very top of page 16 is the potential for a serious trojan horse. It’s recommended that the federal government be responsible for developing and using surveys that would measure the public’s trust in their local law enforcement.

1.7.1 ACTION ITEM: The Federal Government should develop survey tools and instructions for use of such a model to prevent local departments from incurring the expense and to allow for consistency across jurisdictions. A model such as the National Institute of Justice-funded National Police Research Platform could be developed and deployed to conduct such surveys. This platform seeks to advance the science and practice of policing in the United States by introducing a new system of measurement and feedback that captures organizational excellence both inside and outside the walls of the agency. The platform is managed by a team of leading police scholars from seven universities supported by the operational expertise of a respected national advisory board.

The only time the federal government ever wants to be in charge of the research is when they want to find a way to either take over something or tax it (or take it over and then tax it).

Further down page 16 we find another gemstone…..

1.8.1 ACTION ITEM: The Federal Government should create a Law Enforcement Diversity Initiative designed to help communities diversify law enforcement departments to reflect the demographics of the community.

Okay, show of hands, who still thinks that Affirmative Action was/is a good idea? No? I didn’t think so. Now, how about Affirmative Action in law enforcement? Let’s see….new hires and promotions are no longer based on performance but are now directed by color, race, gender, etc. Yep, that’s exactly how I want to handle public safety. Who cares about quality performance anyway.

Finally getting to move on to page 17 I found something that almost made me spew my Coke (cola) all over my laptop.

1.8.3 ACTION ITEM: Successful law enforcement agencies should be highlighted and celebrated and those with less diversity should be offered technical assistance to facilitate change. Law enforcement agencies must be continuously creative with recruitment efforts and employ the public, business, and civic communities to help.

“Technical assistance”? “Creative with recruitment efforts”? Remember earlier when I said that government only wants to be involved when they can either take it over or tax it? This falls under the heading of taking it over.

Not to be outdone by Action Item 1.8.3, Action Item 1.8.4 was equally disturbing.

1.8.4 ACTION ITEM: Discretionary federal funding for law enforcement programs could be influenced by that department’s efforts to improve their diversity and cultural and linguistic responsiveness.

So, let me get this straight…..hire more black people and you get more money. Learn to speak Spanish and you get more money. Don’t do all the things that the federal research found necessary and now you’re losing money. Maybe I’m overreacting, but this sounds for all the world to me like “Do what we say or the public safety of your community will suffer.” Folks, that’s a threat. And I don’t take lightly to being threatened.

Now that my feathers are thoroughly ruffled, I tried to move on. I didn’t get far. On the bottom of page 17 was this:

1.9.1 ACTION ITEM: Decouple federal immigration enforcement from routine local policing for civil enforcement and nonserious crime.

Let me translate this one for those of you who don’t speak legal-ese. “If you pull over someone for speeding and you see that they’re in the country illegally you are NOT allowed to detain them and process them for deportation. Only the federal government can do that.”

Correct me if I’m wrong but the first part of the term illegal immigrant is “illegal”, indicating that they’ve already broken the law. Just by the virtue of them being here illegally we don’t know if they’re a threat or not because we have no historical records or background checks. In 2011, 12% of the illegal aliens who were deported were deported because they had committed a violent crime….another 23% were deported due to drug offenses (Office of Immigration Statistics). I don’t care if you’re Paul Blart, Mall Cop, if you find someone who’s here illegally you should have the right to detain them.

Moving on before I pop a vein…..

Apparently moving on was not an option. At the very top of page 18 was this:

1.9.3 ACTION ITEM: The U.S. Department of Justice should remove civil immigration information from the FBI’s National Crime Information Center database.

This is why I don’t do video blogs. After reading the above action item I literally spent 10 minutes ranting about how stupid of an idea this is and about how the one administration who swore the most transparency has actually spent more time and money trying to conceal crap than any other administration in history. Ridiculous.

My first [calm] response to this is very simple – why? Why doesn’t the government want that information included? If someone were arrested for a crime shouldn’t it also show that they’ve committed another crime by entering the country illegally? There was another terrifying thought that came to mind once my mind had calmed down enough to actually think. What is the main purpose of the FBI database? To register felony offenses. Right? Why? So that employers can know what kind of people they’re hiring. If removed from the FBI database, illegal aliens would be able to apply for jobs and their employers never know that they’re here illegally. So now we’re potentially being exposed to violent criminals AND we’re making it so that they can take our jobs. Lovely.

Fortunately, this is the end of “Pillar” One. Thank God because these 18 pages alone have given me a tremendous headache…probably as a result of high blood pressure.

I’ll be posting Part Two to this later when I delve into “Pillar Two: Policy & Oversight”. If you have the time, I urge you to read the report for yourself. I can’t encourage you strongly enough to always, ALWAYS, do your own research and confirm what you read before you believe or dismiss it. Here’s the link to the report and Obama’s COPS program.

Time for a little peaceful revolution……..

My dad always said if you didn’t like something then either fix it or shut up complaining about it. Unfortunately, I can’t just “fix” our government – believe me, I wish I could.

However, WE the PEOPLE do have tools that we can use to remind the politicians who pays their paychecks. I’m suggesting we utilize one of the best methods of getting Big Brother’s attention….a strike. Please check out the FB group 9/11 Liberty Strike and join the revolution!

9/11 Liberty Strike FB Group 

The country would be a better place if only……

Every day I read what is happening around our country and it makes me so…angry. I’m angry that too often too many people can’t look past the ends of their own noses to see how their thoughts and actions are impacting those around them, their communities, and the country as a whole.

So here it is, my list of things (in no particular order) that could help make the country a better place if people would only do them…or stop doing them as some of the cases may be.

1. Disagreeing with Obama or the results of the George Zimmerman trial DOES NOT make you a racist. I can not tell you how many times I have sided with the factual evidence and been called a racist because the facts went against something the African American community was supporting.

2. Stop putting the blame on somebody/something else and accept that sometimes people just screw up. Liberals want to blame the Republicans, the Republicans are blaming the Democrats, and everybody blames the guns. What the hell?!?!?! Guns don’t kill people….stupid people kill people and if they didn’t have a gun they would just find some other weapon with which to accomplish their mayhem. Responsible, legal gun owners SAVE lives. There are statistics to back this up (refer to http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ABo7Dg4gQTg).

3. In line with #2 above, start taking responsibility for who you are, what you have, and what you do. “The government owes me money cause I’m a minority.”  “I deserve this because so-and-so has one.”   “The state owes me ’cause I’ve got 4 babies and another one on the way”.  Okay, from someone who grew up in poverty with parents who couldn’t give me anything except love, let me tell you something – nobody owes you shit! I grew up wearing ratty, tattered clothes, living in a trailer that probably should have been condemned, and spent many, many nights doing my homework by flashlight because our power had been shut off.  My dad had polio as a child and it left him disabled, but the government denied his claims for disability. My mom worked herself sick, sometimes up to 20 hours a day, just to be able to feed me and my two half brothers (Dad’s from a previous marriage). We were thankful for what we had and NEVER thought that somebody owed us anything just because we had things tough. Instead, my parents used our dismal circumstances as reasoning as to why getting an education is so important – so that I didn’t have to live that way. Now, I’m 2 semesters away from my Masters in Social Work and I tell people everyday that each of us has the ability inside of us to change our paths and become who we want to be. And if you’ve got more kids than YOU can take care of, stop having them. Birth control is free – there is no excuse for mass reproduction than ignorance and a continued desire to leech off those who are trying to survive on their own.

4. For the love of God, EDUCATE YOURSELVES about what’s going on around you. Too often people are complacent to just sit back and allow their lives to be controlled by others that they ASSUME will make the best decisions for them. Don’t bet on it. People are motivated by money, even those who have supposedly taken oaths to protect us. Our elected officials do not answer to us, they answer to the pharmaceutical companies, the lobbyists, and the unions. Don’t expect them to have YOUR best interests in mind simply because you voted for them.  Follow the money and you’ll find out who your officials really answer to.

5. Tying in with #4 above, don’t believe everything the media tells you. As someone who’s married to a 25-year veteran news editor for a local television station, I can tell you that a human being determines WHAT goes on the air and what ANGLE it is approached from. If you have a liberal news producer, your conservative story is going to get ZERO publicity and vice-versa. There is no such thing as “unbiased” in the media, so if you want the full story go to multiple sources and research it from multiple viewpoints.

6. Get off the fence. The primary reason this country is in the state that it’s in is too many people choose NOT to do something about it. People, things don’t just miraculously work themselves out. It takes effort, work, and most of the time a good bit of compromise from both sides, but sitting on the fence gets us nowhere. My dad always told me, “You have no right to gripe about something unless you first try to fix it.” Smart man. Quit complaining that crime is too high and start demanding stricter sentences for repeat offenders. Stop complaining that we spend too much tax money on prisons and start demanding an alternative.  I personally think they should bring back the gladiator games for death penalty inmates and provide the prisoners with a choice – immediate carrying out of their sentence by means of lethal injection or a chance at a 5-year reprieve if they win the gladiator games.  Charge for viewing rights for the games and use the money to fund the prisons, using whatever funds are leftover to fund education. It’s a win-win for everybody – prisoners get a choice, communities become safer, and the economy gets a boost.

7. Agree to respectfully disagree. Everybody has their own personal beliefs and values, and no one person’s is better or more important than the next’s. Provided one person’s beliefs do not endanger or harm others, I say let them be. I am a Christian. I believe in Christ as my Savior and I believe in God the Father. That does not mean that you have to believe the same way. I respect you as a human being regardless of whether you believe the same as I do or not. Jewish? One of my best friends is Jewish. Atheist? Yep, friends with those too. The only people I have issues with are those who condone/demand human suppression and violence to support their beliefs (such as members of Westboro Baptist Church and Sharia Muslims).

8. Practice random acts of kindness. Oh how much better the world would be if each of us did one act of random kindness every day.

9. This is America, we speak ENGLISH….not Spanish, not Portuguese, not ebonics, and definitely not the “lazy English” being spoken by many young people today where they’re slaughtering the English language by being too lazy to properly enunciate all of the syllables.  Do not speak like that and then get upset when people can’t understand you! And if you are someone who has a speech impairment/impediment, this in NO WAY applies to you and I will do everything within my ability to accommodate and help you.

10. Perspective and respect. People need to spend a little more time thinking about how they would react if someone did to them what they’re about to do.  How would I feel if someone pulled up next to me with rap music blaring profanity so loudly that my two young kids in the backseat can still hear it even with the windows rolled up and our own music playing as loud as is safe for our ears? How would I feel if someone else refused to control their children and let them run loose all over the store, getting into everything and breaking things, and even tripping people by darting out right in front of them? Common sense is a dwindling commodity in this country. Let’s say we bring it back.

I’m sure others have great ideas about ways we can improve the country. These are just my suggestions that I think would get us back on the right track. They may offend some people, but I’m just trying to do what my daddy taught me….

“You have no right to gripe about something unless you first try to fix it.”