Another murderous weekend in Chicago: ho-hum, who cares?

Chicago PD Father's Day Crime SceneRight.

Because Leftists and the federal government and Obaka and his minions are too busy condemning guns for being the Prime Evil in Orlando.  SQUIRREL!

For the dolts, dafts, proles, Demorats, American Media Maggots, groundlings, Free Cheesers, Leftists, voting felons and Socialists amongst us, they bit.

But in the meantime, this past Father’s Day weekend had any number of Baby Daddies shooting and killing other Baby Daddies.

From the ChicagoTribune.com:

City records 300th homicide with 13 over Father’s Day weekend

by Alexandra Chachevitch and Peter Nickeas

The city recorded its 300th homicide this weekend and went on to record six others over a 60-hour period that saw 59 people shot, 13 fatally, from Friday afternoon through early Monday morning.

So far this year, about 1,800 people have been shot across the city and more than 200 of those wounded have died of their wounds, according to records kept by the Chicago Tribune. A total of 306 people have been killed this year by shooting, stabbing or other means, Tribune records show.

Details?

Five people were fatally shot and nine others were hurt between Friday afternoon and Saturday morning. Four of the fatalities occurred in seven hours. The fatalities included a 16-year-old boy who was killed in West Englewood about 9:05 p.m. Friday. He was in the front passenger seat of a car driving through an alley in the 6500 block of South Hamilton Avenue when two males came up and fired shots, according to police.

At least 28 people were wounded, three fatally, in shootings from 8:30 a.m. Saturday to 4:30 a.m. Sunday, the equivalent of somebody shot every 43 minutes. One fatal shooting occurred during a possible murder-suicide in Hyde Park about 9:50 a.m. Saturday, police said. Police responded to the 1400 block of East 54th Street for a well-being check and found a 65-year-old woman with a gunshot wound to the head. A man, 73, also was found shot in the head.

Blood In The StreetI mean, really.  This is getting so tedious.  Leftists keep advocating the killing of blacks and other minorities.  “Don’t look at Chicago.  Move along.  Nothing to see here.”

Check this as well.

Black.  Lives.  Don’t.  Matter.

It’s also clear:lying about Islam doesn’t matter either.

BZ

 

Aunt Tom spills the beans on the Clintons *

* But for the wrong reasons.
BREAKING NEWSStop the presses!  There is a young black woman spilling the beans on how racist the Demorats and, specifically, the Clintons truly are?

That the Demorats and, specifically, the Clintons profit from keeping black people down?

Yes, stop those presses.

Because someone is telling the truth and that is such a rarity in today’s American Media Maggot industry.

From TheNation.com:

Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote

by Michelle Alexander

From the crime bill to welfare reform, policies Bill Clinton enacted—and Hillary Clinton supported—decimated black America.

Hillary Clinton loves black people. And black people love Hillary—or so it seems. Black politicians have lined up in droves to endorse her, eager to prove their loyalty to the Clintons in the hopes that their faithfulness will be remembered and rewarded. Black pastors are opening their church doors, and the Clintons are making themselves comfortably at home once again, engaging effortlessly in all the usual rituals associated with “courting the black vote,” a pursuit that typically begins and ends with Democratic politicians making black people feel liked and taken seriously. Doing something concrete to improve the conditions under which most black people live is generally not required.

Wait.  Is there actually a young black female who sees through the Hillary Clinton pandering-to-blacks-bullshit — as exemplified, for instance, with her condescending “accent” here in a black church?

People see what they want to see, and for too long blacks have seen “goodness” in the Clintons, when there really isn’t anything present in the Clintons save that of self-enrichment.

According to some polls, she leads Bernie Sanders by as much as 60 percent among African Americans. It seems that we—black people—are her winning card, one that Hillary is eager to play.

And it seems we’re eager to get played. Again.

Ah, finally an American journalist “gets it.”  Because mostly the American Media Maggots, lapdogs for the Clintons and Leftists, don’t want to “get it.”

From the Clinton saxophone on Arsenio Hall to the “our first black president” quote, the Clintons have curried black votes.  And mostly gotten them.

What have the Clintons done to earn such devotion? Did they take extreme political risks to defend the rights of African Americans? Did they courageously stand up to right-wing demagoguery about black communities? Did they help usher in a new era of hope and prosperity for neighborhoods devastated by deindustrialization, globalization, and the disappearance of work?

No. Quite the opposite.

Uh oh.  This might not be good.  For the Clintons.

Alexander asks: if the time under Bill Clinton was good for the Clintons and supposedly for America, what was it like for blacks?

Bill Clinton presided over the largest increase in federal and state prison inmates of any president in American history. Clinton did not declare the War on Crime or the War on Drugs—those wars were declared before Reagan was elected and long before crack hit the streets—but he escalated it beyond what many conservatives had imagined possible. He supported the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity for crack versus powder cocaine, which produced staggering racial injustice in sentencing and boosted funding for drug-law enforcement.

Clinton championed the idea of a federal “three strikes” law in his 1994 State of the Union address and, months later, signed a $30 billion crime bill that created dozens of new federal capital crimes, mandated life sentences for some three-time offenders, and authorized more than $16 billion for state prison grants and the expansion of police forces. The legislation was hailed by mainstream-media outlets as a victory for the Democrats, who “were able to wrest the crime issue from the Republicans and make it their own.”

And that is how Alexander’s slant is now revealed.  The Three Strikes law federally and in many state governments was largely responsible for the reduction of crime in the mid-to-late 90s and early 2000s.  The streets were calmer, safer, violent crime was down and New York under Giuliani was the safest it had been in at least two decades.

Demorats made crime their issue because, for a few years, Bill Clinton waltzed about in a brief fog of clarity and resolution.  He was always a much more insightful politician than Hillary ever was or will be.

Uh-oh; looks like Bill Clinton pissed off Alexander.  Because, in her estimation, Bill wrapped blacks in the Clinton cloak of betrayal because he did something about crime.  Alexander writes:

All of the presidents since 1980 have contributed to mass incarceration, but as Equal Justice Initiative founder Bryan Stevenson recently observed, “President Clinton’s tenure was the worst.”

Taking a hard look at this recent past is about more than just a choice between two candidates. It’s about whether the Democratic Party can finally reckon with what its policies have done to African-American communities, and whether it can redeem itself and rightly earn the loyalty of black voters.

Oh the shame!  Oh the breast-beating!  Oh the abject treachery!  Crime down, criminals arrested!

An oft-repeated myth about the Clinton administration is that although it was overly tough on crime back in the 1990s, at least its policies were good for the economy and for black unemployment rates. The truth is more troubling. As unemployment rates sank to historically low levels for white Americans in the 1990s, the jobless rate among black men in their 20s who didn’t have a college degree rose to its highest level ever. This increase in joblessness was propelled by the skyrocketing incarceration rate.

Really, Alexander?  The truth is, the 90s were when more educated and qualified minorities were hired for law enforcement than at any other time in US history.  My department hired more blacks, more Asians, more hispanics than at any time, more than Caucasoids.  How do I know this?  Because I worked backgrounds, doing checks on potential recruits for our academies.  Further, these new black, Asian, hispanic and female graduates were placed, after graduation, directly into plumb assignments with little or no street experience in order to be more “progressive.”  Ahead of Caucasoids males, of course.

That’s how we got Rampart, for example, you see.  Because behind the scenes law enforcement and other businesses were lowering their standards.  How do I know?  Because I watched it.  I helped do the hiring and was involved in the academy training.  I knew how tests and evaluations were jury-rigged because the department wanted to be “more diverse.”  All over.

Now, demographically in Fornicalia, the minorities are the Caucasoids.

So stop with the whining, Alexander.  What you’re saying is that, for a time, because it was politically expeditious and the public was tired of being shot and raped and murdered and robbed — INCLUDING BLACKS — steps were taken to reduce crime.  And guess what?  It worked.

But in a way Alexander is quite correct.  The Demorats haven’t done blacks any favors for not just years, but decades.  Bill and Hillary were just a small portion of the destruction.  The greatest destruction came about when Demorats decided to pay young black women to keep fathers away from the once-nuclear black family, resulting in a corrosive black culture and the utter breakdown of the black family, a breakdown that continues today.

Crime is trending up, for the multiple reasons I delineated here.  But let’s not just delude ourselves about Moar Free Cheese as Alexander wishes.  Let’s point out that today blacks comprise 13% of the US population but commit 37% of all US murders.  Let’s call that disproportional, shall we?  It is also a fact — all of the above by way of FBI statistics — that 90% of black murders are committed by blacks. Let’s call that also by what it is: startlingly disproportional.  But truthful.

Nice try, Alexander, but I happen to be older than you and lived through those times.  I know what happened and I have the societal results to prove it.

Interesting concepts; wrong reasons.

BZ

 

No freedom of speech for cops

PPB, ORI retired a few months ago after having 41 years in law enforcement, working for the FBI, being a sworn US Marshal, and serving two local Fornicalia agencies.  If I had a son or daughter considering law enforcement I’d tell them to look elsewhere and to become a nurse, a plumber, an electrical contractor, mechanic, electrical engineer or programmer — a job that cannot readily be replaced by a robot.  And I’d stay away from law enforcement because more and more the job involves politics not service, and you have fewer rights than the citizens you serve.  That trend is growing, not receding.

Including freedom of speech.

People eschewing law enforcement will occur in any event, because Millennials are not used to or desire to serve, sacrifice or have their freedoms of speech curtailed.  The small group of Millennials who do understand about sacrifice and service for a higher goal or greater good are former military personnel — but their ranks are thinning as well.

From OregonLive.com:

Portland police officer removed from street after Twitter message about Black Lives Matter

by Maxine Bernstein

A Portland police officer who wrote a Twitter message complaining that he’d be stuck late at work Friday night “to babysit these fools,” referring to a planned Black Lives Matter-Not Black Friday march at Lloyd Center, has been taken off the street while an internal investigation proceeds.

Portland police Acting Chief Donna Henderson, filling in for Chief Larry O’Dea who is off until next week, announced the investigation Tuesday afternoon in a news release.

“I am highly offended, and I think other people should be,” said Teressa Raiford, a community activist involved in Don’t Shoot Portland. “I think it’s very unprofessional, especially someone in his position.”

Officer John Hurlman, a 24-year bureau veteran, removed the post from his Twitter feed, but a screen shot was caught by others.

His message read, “Black Lives Matter is planning to protest at Lloyd Center on black Friday. Oh joy, stuck late again at work to babysit these fools.”

Damn that officer for daring to state the obvious.  BLM activists are fools because black lives don’t matterYou may care to read this link, as well as this and this and this for my reasoning.

Further, the story doesn’t immediately reveal this salient fact: the officer produced that message on his own time, off duty, with his own account and not utilizing government resources.

But because of the community it serves, the ball-less Portland Police Bureau circled its own little Leftist wagons and, realizing that if a sympathetic take wasn’t promptly expressed, the BLM activists would soon be torching the sycophantic little purple-skied territory of Portland itself.  Precisely because BLM “activists” couldn’t give a fuck.  It ain’t their property they’d burn and loot and destroy.  BLM “activists” enjoy embracing lies for the “common good” of themselves only.

It is interesting, however, to read some of the comments below the article I linked, which include some of the following:

Why aren’t black lives matter going door to door where black people live spreading their message not to kill black people?

So does this mean if a neo-nazi group were to march, only those police officers who agree with the neo nazi’s could work the neo-nazi march that day?  

Oh yes, such a peaceful community group that chants:”What do we want, dead cops, when do we want ’em. NOW!” and “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon!”

Nothing like stomping on the man’s First Amendment Rights…  What’s next from the “Thought Police”?  Lie detector tests for anybody accused of having an alternative viewpoint or perspective contrary to the Left’s?  Give me a break… 

You are assuming that somebody being called a fool should lose their job?  Does that mean I should lose my job by calling you an idiot?  Just trying to understand your perspective of justice and equality…

Office Hurlman was correct in his personal opinion description of  BLM as fools, and I would submit that the even bigger fool is acting like a moron chief Donna Henderson.  Calling someone a fool is speech protected by the 1st ammendment.  The officer did not threaten or encourage any one to threaten or harm anyone.  The Portland PD admin is wrong on this one and should publicly admit such.

So I guess you feel that the officer has to take responsibility for expressing a personal opinion on a personal twitter account? A personal opinion that did not threaten anyone?  Is that what you are trying to say?  If so, you are one misguided soul.

These comments mostly reflect a rational response to ridiculous political correctness being exercised by the Portland police chief. The sane ones among us look at the BLM fools and state the obvious. The BLM fools falsely perpetuate the myth that Michael Ferguson had his “hands up” when he was killed, when the forensic evidence shows he did not. Even the Obama administration’s Justice Department investigation concluded he was justifiably killed by a police officer defending his life. But the BLM fools refuse to believe it and agitate for the sake of agitating. They, and you by extension, can’t be reasoned with. You’re too blinded by your grievance ideology.

There are more than 1,000 additional comments.

I spoke over the air earlier this week on the Hugh Hewitt Radio Show to retired Congressman John Campbell (R, CA, 45th & 48th Dist) who was admirably filling in for Mr Hewitt.  The topic concerned the rise of homicide rates and overall crime in major cities and elsewhere.

I indicated there were any number of factors for this rise, but one of the major factors now is the lack of what law enforcement calls “self-initiated activity,” which translates to getting in there, digging, knowing your beat, district, precinct, area, community, and seriously working it.  Looking for crime, turning over the rocks and getting actively involved.  In other words, proactive vs reactive law enforcement.

Certainly, cops won’t shirk their calls for service.  Whenever the laptop or terminal beeps, or the radio beckons, cops will attend to their assignments.  But once there, it exists in their minds that they too could be another Darren Wilson.  Being “right” isn’t enough.  Being “lawful” isn’t enough.  And what law enforcement, the public and courts will soon realize: having a video body-cam isn’t enough.  Video is another tool — it is not the end-all panacea just as having the melanin-count match the neighborhood isn’t an end-all panacea.  Just ask Baltimore or New York or Chicago or LA, some of the most mixed race departments across the nation if not the planet.

Cops talk about officer survival.  The mindset that, “no matter what happens to me, I will prevail during a given critical incident.  I will survive to see another call, to help my partner, to see my family and fight another day.”

A few years ago in 2009 and 2010, besides officer survival my deputies faced budgetary survival.  My department eliminated over two-hundred deputy positions.

Cops are having to additionally consider political and career survival.

They are having to ask: just how deep into this call do I want to go?  Just how far do I want to dig into my beat or district or precinct?  Particularly in terms of political survival or career, officers are now asking: what is my career worth?  Where is the line where I’ll even remotely consider jeopardizing my family’s future?  The security of my wife or husband, my children, my retirement?

Even more important to officers is this: does my department have my back if I acted in good faith and within the “reasonable officer” mantra?

Darren Wilson was proven correct, he was completely acquitted on any number of levels by any number of investigative resources and separate agencies including — literally — one hundred FBI agents swarming over Ferguson and the case itself.

Yet Darren Wilson had to physically leave his department, had to take his family and physically leave the town where he was employed and, truly, will forever be unemployable by any law enforcement agency in the US.  He and his family received very serious death threats and his department had little interest in supporting or providing security for him.

You ask why crimes, homicides and the like are starting to increase?  The so-called “Ferguson Effect” is most definitely a factor no matter what any police administrator or spokesperson says.  I know this because my own deputies tell me so.  Quietly.  They are constantly having to weigh these thoughts on their calls.  They are doing the “balance test.”  How do I do my job while not jeopardizing myself, family or future?

And that is the truth.

Portland, Oregon is certainly the locus of Leftist thought in Oregon, right there with Seattle, and the Portland PB isn’t radically different from the Leftards it protects.

Ladies and gentlemen, Leftists, Demorats and Progressives alike, if you don’t like cops — they’re too judgmental — but instead wish to be involved in a Robocop future, monitored and arrested by mechanicals, you are well on your way.  You won’t care for it one bit when the human element is eliminated.  You can’t argue or reason with a robot.

Perhaps you’d just care to do away with your civilian police protection altogether.  Make sure, however, that if this is your choice you likewise surrender all your firearms, defensive or offensive materials such as slingshots, baseball bats, rocks and any sort of edged weapon.  Hell, any weapon whatsoever.  Live by your code.  Be honest and live your honesty.  Mark or placard your car, your house, your apartment, your tent as a WEAPONS FREE ZONE.  Be proud of your philosophies and take a real stand.  Show some courage.

There is a problem however: when you have fewer and fewer persons who desire to be Sheepdogs, your society is in greater and greater jeopardy from within and without.  Because the wolves, you ignorant and complacent sheep, are not reducing their numbers.

Your job is already being targeted for elimination by robots, Mr and Ms Millennial.  Your life, property and sense of security is already being target by criminals whose philosophy is generally “what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine unless you have the strength to stop me.”  Gosh.  Just like Islamists or China or Russia.  Or any bully.

You think that won’t or can’t happen?  Just you watch.

BZ

P.S.

Officer John Hurlman, an extremely interesting article about freedom of speech and police officers can be found here, at the FraternalOrderof Police.net.

You may find it handy and applicable.  You also might wish to click here and here.