Blame the "Protectors" but not the "Doers?"

It often appears as if the so-called civilized world has lost its mind.  One of the recent news articles said that those who erroneously allowed the truck driver in Nice onto the road where he killed so many people were being blamed...at least in part...for the deaths.  The anger in France...or in any country where terrorists act out...should be focused on the terrorist(s), not those who do their level best to protect others.  The French are not alone in their apparent desire to ignore the actual "doer" of the atrocity in favor of attacking those who were trying to prevent such occurrences.

In America, I have seen minorities "cop and attitude" with police when approached for almost anything.  In an era where minorities have ambushed and assassinated police, those who serve as police are logically on alert.  When they approach someone and issue an order (such as "don't move your hands" or "keep you hands where I can see them") and that order is not obeyed, I know of no logical person who wouldn't react as if there were a developing threat and react accordingly.  But in the aftermath of these events, even our President accuses police of "overreacting" ...or even of discrimination.

Today, in America it is not hard to get a cop fired.  This administration will virtually require local police departments to punish and/or fire any officer who is complained of by any minority.  The logical action, then, would be to behave very quietly when approached by any member of the law enforcement community and then bring it to the attention of the police department and the Justice Department.  Instead, some just insist on not obeying commands and/or mouthing off as they move their hands in ways that could constitute a threat.

Who is blamed?  Why, the law enforcement officer(s) of course.

Over the years, I have been approached by police nine or ten times.  Each time, I responded as I would have to any person with authority: directly and politely.  Was I uneasy?  Sure...in some cases I wasn't sure what I had done wrong, in others I had been speeding and was chagrined that I had been "caught."  Another time there had been a "hit and run" and I was questioned if I had seen a particular color and make vehicle.  And one time, coming home from school, I had a brake light that wasn't working.  Big Deal?  Not really.  Life goes on around us and sometimes we're the hammer and other times we are the nail.

What I don't understand is why the human race seems bent on allowing those who initiate behavior that results in consequences feel that it is appropriate to deflect consequences on the responder instead of the "doer" who's actions began the whole thing.  I can understand how the people involved would like to accomplish that...but not society as a whole, each member of which should know better.

Why such an increase in lawlessness?

While certain crimes appear to be fewer in number, general lawlessness seems on the increase, as does a disrespect for the concept of Law.  Why?

Some argue that increased enforcement of laws has also come with lawless behavior on the part of those enforcing laws.  Is that true...or is that a nurtured perception made possible by the ubiquitous nature of phone cameras and the social networks that make no effort to separate truth from fiction?  Whatever the truth, and I would suggest the impact is relatively small, that does not really help to answer the question as to basic cause.

There is a theory that of the total population in America, there are about 20% that will always try to do the right and just thing, regardless of the law, its enforcement or the attitude of those around them.  That theory also puts forward the likelihood that about 15% of the people in the country are true psychopaths, who ignore the law and attitudes about them with the exception of the care they take to do exactly what they want to, when they want to.  Laws have no effect on them, and they regard the attitude of others as inconsequential.  That leaves 65% of the population.  That 65% is arguably highly influenced by the attitude of those around them and the degree of enforcement that various laws receive; if a law is ignored by the authorities, they will ignore it and break it with impunity and no sense of guilt...if a law is enforced and stringent punishments applied in a timely manner, they will forego breaking that law, even if they would wish to.  While I can not verify the percentages suggested, I have no doubt that the three categories exist and that the vast majority of the populace is affected by laws and their enforcement.

So...back to the question.

It is inarguable that most of the laws in America are NOT enforced effectively; many are archaic and remain on the books, others are spottily enforced to the point where people are fined when caught but the vast majority will break those laws to some degree because of the small odds of being caught.  But these factors have always been around and can be considered a constant.

So, let us turn to the matter of "selective" enforcement of laws...and almost as importantly, the selective "unenforcement" of laws.  Laws were intended to reflect "right" behavior.  Over time the concept or "right" and "wrong" have, for better or worse, gone by the wayside and now the law reflects "legal" and "illegal" behavior.  Often this allows what is clearly wrong to be allowed as legal.  This muddies the waters of any logical mind as they view the power and dictates of a formal society that has a governmental presence to enforce this "Legal" point of view.  Civil Rights is a case in point where for years "wrong" was "legal."  People broke the "law" to point this out.  What was remarkable in the last century, however, was that those who broke those laws expected and were willing to suffer the legal punishment in order to bring attention to the "wrongness" of those laws.  They did not expect to go unpunished; they respected the need of laws to be enforced if they were to have any validity at all...that to not be punished would take away the efficacy of ALL laws.

That is no longer true today.  The Judicial System, including both judges and prosecutors, frees without penalty the vast majority of those arrested by police officers with little regard for the fact of the misdeed in favor of the technicalities that allow them to release most accused.  In truth, such actions have fostered a belief in the majority of our citizens that most laws don't matter and there is little reason to be concerned for, or expect the meaningful enforcement of, the law generally.

Then we have the example set by the Federal Government of the United States of America;  The President ignores laws on the books and directs law enforcement personnel to disregard them; the Congress passes RICO statutes but exempts themselves from the application of them; the Justice Department ignores perjury in sworn statements to Congress on the basis of political alignment, and then fails to elicit facts of disputes before condemning those front line Police Officers around the country tasked to be the first line of defense against lawlessness and crime.   Government employees routinely break the law and are, save for the very occasional sacrificial lamb, never punished in any way, while citizens are routinely charged, have their money and property taken without due process and otherwise abused.  Arguably the Federal Government made Organized Crime illegal because it didn't want the competition.  And now, many would argue that they now are willing to license such activities as long as they get their share.

So why is there any wonder at all as to why lawlessness is on the increase.  There is little, if any, honor of the concept of "what is RIGHT" in Washington.  Instead, it is whether something is legal or...if illegal...proof can be eliminated.  Our "Leaders" set the example and then they complain that we do as they do instead of as the "say".

Our police departments know how to fix this...but they are ignored.  It is the "broken window" approach: take notice and action against the smallest infraction and it will lessen the tendency of more egregious law breaking to take place.  Protect the civil nature of a neighborhood and lawbreakers find it harder to have a disparate impact.  Bring to trial those who are accused quickly so that both the miscreant and the public understand the relationship between the misdeed and the punishment (does anyone other than a victim's family really connect a killer being put to death with the horror of their crime 10 or 15 years ago?).

A true Leader...a Representative Government...trusts the system to discover and prosecute fairly those who break the laws.  They forego pre-judging any matter, as that is for a jury of the citizenry, not an elected or appointed official, to rule.  And even as the quality and training of our Law Enforcement Personnel is scrutinized and their performance analyzed, there is respect and a demand made by all for the well-being and honoring of those who put their safety at risk to protect the rest of us.

ALL lives, including the quality of those lives, matter.  Those who call for the killing of members of the Police Force are inciting lawlessness.  Truly, if they were to be successful and we return to mob rule, it is they who would fall as the first victims of majority mob rule.  Be careful what you wish for.

A cohesive argument can be made that the true cause of the current state of disrespect and disregard for the law lies with the actions and words of the United States Federal Government...and that they should be held accountable.

Do Sharpton, Holder and Mr. Obama want to return to "separate but equal?"

It is tough to understand just what the most recent class of demonstrators really want.  They shout for "justice" and for "dead policemen."  But then the media says that they don't really want that.  So...when will the demonstrators speak for themselves and say what they truly want?

Are we to accept that the triumvirate of  President Obama, Al Sharpton, and Eric Holder...and their acolyte, Mayor deBlasio...speak for the group as a whole?  I wonder.  None of that group seems truly dedicated to the plight of black neighborhoods except as it fits and advances their own purposes.  So...what, indeed, is the desire of the unhappy resident of a black community.

The one thing I have heard and read that repeats itself is that they want the police force to be "representative."  In Ferguson that meant that almost all the police were white and didn't understand how to police a black neighborhood.  That does sound reasonable.  It certainly made sense to me.  But then the question is raised just how to accomplish that.  Because, if you do get the desired percentage of black officers, you would still have some percent of white officers continuing to police the black neighborhood.

Ah, I hear, but those white police can be trained to understand how to police the black community "properly."  Oh, really?

I have had black acquaintances and friends tell be that it is impossible for any white person to understand the attitude of any black man or women; that without experiencing it, you just cannot know what it is like.  Well, that sounds accurate too.  Although I think we can all try a bit more to understand those who come from different backgrounds.

Consider the facts that underlie the recent minority (make that "black) deaths in conflict with the police:  first, the (white) policeman in Ferguson was undeniably being attacked and the dead (black) teen would undeniably faced felony charges of attacking a police officer if he had survived;  second, in NYC, the supervising police officer of that arrest was black and there is absolutely no evidence that suggests that there was any racially-based "misunderstanding" of the circumstances of the arrest. (And, let it be noted that there was in fact no actual "choke-hold"; that the deceased died because of the combination of being held down and his own respiratory issues.)

So each of these events were fact based...not racially oriented at all, except by those who wished to promote anarchy, violence, looting and burning.  And those people were honored by comments by President Obama, and the additional gift of the presence of both Eric Holder and Al Sharpton, the President's "go-to guy" on racial issues (although, since he himself is black, one wonders why the President should have to have any assistance in understanding the black community and the nuances of their feelings and desires...but perhaps that is a subject for further discussion another day).

The recurring theme is "we want to be policed by black police officers because they will "understand."

That seems to suggest that they want to segregate the police force so that they can have justice.  They will feel less "threatened" if they have black men in blue in their community.

Do any of you have any suspicions as to what the general populace, and the media in particular, might have to say about such a suggestion if it were made by people in a white community suggesting that they only wanted "white" police officers protecting their interests because only "white" officers "understood" them?  Think that one would fly?  Even get off the ground?  Yet...that is what is the base of the desire of Mr. Obama, Mr. Holder and Mr. Sharpton (No one quite knows what Mayor deBlasio wants or thinks...and no expects to understand that anytime soon.)  They don't use, of course, the phrase "separate but equal" but they refer to "representational" numbers of minority officers.

For some reason, I have always thought that the laws of this country were not "nuanced" by the culture of those who broke a law; that if you were rich or poor, it was still wrong to steal, kill and hurt people.  I believe(d) that one spoke civilly to others, obeyed directions given to you by an officer of the law and, if disturbed by it, argue the propriety about the order later...in a court of law.  You didn't talk back to your parents, your boss or a policeman.  Perhaps I am wrong, but I do not recall any indication that those absolutes were colored ( no pun intended) by the race, nationality, skin pigment, or social position of either the policeman (or other person of authority) of the person being directed to behave in a certain way.  Did I miss that?  I don't think so.

Should be come to accept that black, and other minority communities should be policed by people of their own race, background and gender, it will not be long before those minorities will demand that their teachers by of the same race; that they have bankers of their own race; that all of their political representative be of their own race.

Will the occasional white resident in a black community then have the right to demonstrate, damage, hurt and burn down the community while demanding that a white person hear their grievance?

And I finish with the observation that a large portion of responsibility for the ongoing unrest lies with the media.  They have allowed and helped to spread false claims and comments about the triggering events that only serve to artificially support those who make a living in the Race Industry, fomenting unrest and gaining notoriety for themselves.  Even as they claim "with hands up" that they are only reporting the "news" they are remarkably selective in their reporting, so the claim of innocence rings hollow indeed.

If the black demonstrators get what they seem to be asking for, I suspect that in the end they will rue the day that they allowed some people to "lead" them down this path.  They will not be better off for traveling that directions.

Selective Anarchy supported by Government Leaders

So one group of people can disregard the law with impunity, blocking traffic, interfering with normal business activity on private property, attack police and chant that police should be killed.  One group of people can burn down major part of a town without any punishment.  A person can chant, "burn it down" and not face consequences when, in fact, many business building in the area are burned down.  One group of people can ignore the demonstrated facts that show that a young, huge thug attacked a police officer and attempted to take that officer's gun and as a result was shot dead, and take that same thug and hold him up as an innocent martyr...and the main stream media parrots that claim as a fact, endorsing the activity.

The United States of America used to be law abiding.  Now our President, the U.S. Attorney General, and the Mayor of one of our largest cities disrespect and accuse our Police Officers of malfeasance.  And they do this while seeming to endorse minority anger and violence toward Police.

And now we have the assassination of two NYC police officers by a guy messaging, "they got one of ours, let's take two of theirs."  Seems a clear connection to the ongoing demonstrations; and the permissive attitude of our top leaders to the law-breaking actions of demonstrators while criticizing police sure contributed to these killings.  And I note myriad "tweets" and other social media comments that commend these killings.

Too bad the police cannot withdraw from all those communities that seem so angry with the police presence for a period...say a month or two...and that would include all of NYC and include the protection detail for the Mayor.  Clearly he feels that NYC would be the utopia he desires if only the police would either be absent, or simply issue verbal suggestions to law breakers.

Show the proper respect to the uniformed Police Officer and problems are rare.  A policeman  usually had a valid reason for any given command; how much intelligence does it take to simply obey and wait for the matter to be resolved?  When not questioning me, a cop is protecting me, my family, and my property, as well as that of my neighbors and friends...why should I want to give him "attitude?"  But I see some people actually look to provoke anyone, much less police, for entertainment.  These are the same people who disrespect their elders, their neighborhood and, unrecognized, themselves.  Yet they seem to believe that they are "entitled!"  None of us is entitled.  All of us have to earn our respect by showing that we can learn from experiences and schooling, hold a job by being on time and doing what we are hired to do, and respecting those around us...not sitting a corner talking trash at anyone who goes by.  Yet our country's leaders seem to be taking the sides of the trash-talkers and throwing law abiding people and the Police who protect us under the bus.  That is NOT acceptable and it is time the majority of America speaks up and puts a stop to it.

Why are Black communitys' violence ignored?

Ferguson has become some sort of rallying cry for the Race Industry.  Seems illogical on the facts: a very large, strong person strong-handed and stole from a store, walked down the middle of a street, interfering with traffic, with a friend, was told by a police officer to get out of the street and onto the sidewalk.  That person then hit the police officer, tried to get hold of gun, ignored commands to stop, then ran at the police officer to attack him and ended up being shot and killed by that police officer.  The behavior of that person was foolish at best and inviting just the result that he suffered at worst.  Yet he is seen as a "victim"?  I don't see a victim.  I see a thug and a danger to society at large.

But because this person was Black, and a teenager, and did not carry a "weapon" (although when a person is well over 6 ft. tall and 300 plus pounds I consider such a person a weapon in their own right) the attacked officer is supposed to not shoot?  The person could have been a Buddhist Monk and I would have shot to protect myself.  This is supposed to be a "Race" matter?  How illogical is that?

Perhaps we could more helpfully look at behavior of Black toward other Blacks; maybe we could consider behavior in the Black communities.  Please?

Ever been in a Black neighborhood and listen to their conversations?  Even in a mixed neighborhood, when 3 or 4 Black males of any age get together (eliminating the older mothers, grandmothers and grandfathers, here) their conversation is almost hidden in insults and obscenities.  Even their greetings of each other are clearly insulting and...in any other group would constitute "fighting" words.

When will the "leaders" of the Black community...no, not the Race Baiters or the rich members of the Race Industry...put their foot down and demand that Blacks respect Blacks?  The leaders I am talking about are the Grandmothers and older mothers who are the only shot at "parents" that so many young children growing up in those communities will ever have.  When will they demand that their children show respect to THEM as well as to all others, regardless of race.  After all, what is happening now is that members of the Black Community are teaching each other disrespect for each other.  And that invites disrespect for everything outside your community...and that leads to both tragedy and poverty.

When will the majority of Blacks turn away from the racist "Race Industry" leaders, like Sharpton and his ilk, and start to follow the example set by so many church congregations in the Black community...no, not the "do-gooders" from white churches who seek to help the "down-trodden" but those within the community who shed tears over the lost potential within, knowing that their children and residents are so much more able than they give themselves credit for.  When they will inspire a turning away from hand-outs but look for opportunities to achieve, not receive.  To succeed, not survive.  The ability is there...it is within.  And it is time that Blacks give themselves the respect that they already deserve.  THEN some ignorant comment by another black or, heaven forbid, a white person will have no meaning...they will be secure in the knowledge of their own worth and achievements.

I sure would like to see them take their shot.  I think we all would be pleasantly amazed at the accomplishments that would result.