Category Archives: Crime

Bill Lockwood: The Black Community & The Disintegration of America 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

That love of order and obedience to the laws, which so remarkably characterize the citizens of the United States, are sure pledges of internal tranquility—Thomas Jefferson.

The disintegration of America is happening before us in slow motion. We are witnessing the complete erosion or our society by violence and mayhem, deliberately brought about by leftist policies that are completely hamstringing not only law-enforcement, but the entire adjudication process as well. In this wake, smash-and-grab gangs of mostly black thugs are now smashing store windows in major cities and robbing merchants blind.

One area where this is particularly harmful is found in dealing with criminal behavior among the black-communities of America. Running from the slur “racism,” the majority-culture has allowed soft-on-crime policies to go unchecked when it comes to minorities. From the school-house to the court-house, to the open-border sponsored by the Biden Administration, a consistent enforcement of rules is a thing of past.

Heather Mac Donald

Heather Mac Donald is the Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute. She is also a best-selling author of many books on cultural issues as well as contributing editor of City Journal. She appeared as a guest on the Tucker Carlson show (guest-hosted by Brian Kilmeade) a few days ago and offered what I consider to be the best “in-a-nutshell” analysis of what is going on in America. Below is the transcription I made.

They were discussing specifically the ending of “cash-bail” for minorities, particularly in light of the Christmas parade homicides committed by Darrell Brooks, Jr. in Waukesha, WI on Nov. 23. Heather Mac Donald speaks first about the growing lawlessness in our society.

She mentions “disparate impact.” This is the concept that policies and procedures and rules appear to have a “disproportionate” impact on minority groups. The assumption is that more blacks are incarcerated, or ticketed, for example, because whites are racist in application of the law. Mac Donald shows that this is nonsense.

Heather: “Brian, we are witnessing the disintegration of civilization right before our eyes. When massive numbers of individuals know that they can rampage through stores, plundering and looting, confidant of their immunity from the law, there is nothing left of the civilized order. The protection of property is the cornerstone of a stable, prosperous society. Merchants have to know they can put their goods in the stream of commerce without being robbed blind.

“Now, the common thread in the shameful looting, in the Waukesha Christmas parade murders, and rising gun violence, is the concept of disparate impact. And unless that concept is explicitly refuted and rejected there’s no way we are going to get a handle on this rising crime.

“The reason that felony theft laws are not being enforced, and the reason Darrell Brooks was put back onto the streets despite an active warrant and a 50-page rap sheet is because enforcing theft laws, … requiring bail, has a disparate impact on blacks.”

Continuing, she adds, “But law enforcement has a disparate impact on blacks, not because its racist, but because the black crime-rate is so high.

“But when you stop enforcing the law in order to avoid disparate impact its blacks who are hurt the most.”

Brian: “Look at the stats; raw numbers. More Blacks are committing crimes than other minority groups, than whites.” “That’s why the arrests are greater and that’s why they are more in jail. Is that what you are saying?”

Heather: “Absolutely. Law enforcement is a function of criminality. It is not driven by racism. The blacks die from homicide at 13 times the rate of whites, that’s because they are committing homicides at 13 times the rate of whites. In NYC, … blacks commit about 75% of all shootings, … even though they are only 23% of the population.” “Whites commit less than 2% of all shootings though they are 34% of the population.”

“So, the solution here is not to stop enforcing the law. That means more mayhem, more deaths. The solution is to tackle – despite what Chesa Boudin (San Francisco DA) thinks is the root cause of crime … he would say poverty and racism—the root cause of inner-city crime is family breakdown.” “As long as that problem goes unaddressed our only solution is to enforce the law in a color-blind just fashion.”

Bill Lockwood: Pickled Minds in Seattle 4 (1)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Bill Lockwood

Pickling is the process by which foods are soaked in various solutions to increase the acidity of the food so that microorganisms that cause illness and food spoilage cannot grow. Socialism, and liberalism in general, takes on the form of a similar “fermenting process” by which logic, reasoning, and simple common sense cannot any longer grow in one’s mind. A case study—a Seattle City Councilwoman named Lisa Herbold.

It is not enough that our unconstitutional socialistic systems such as found in Seattle champion taking money from the “rich” to give to the poor in a multiplicity of government programs including: unemployment benefits, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, government grants, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Medicaid, Federal Student Financial Aid (FAFSA), Free School Meals for Children, Disaster relief programs, WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) subsidies, Senior Citizens’ Aid programs, government assistance with home energy, prescription drug aid, assistance in telephone services, Social Security, disability money, public housing vouchers, and the list goes on.

This is not to mention the fact that there is plenty of voluntary assistance to the poor by a multitude of churches and charitable organizations.

Enough is never enough with the lawless such as Councilwoman Lisa Herbold. She has proposed legislation whereby misdemeanor suspects can escape charges if they can show “symptoms of mental illness or addiction or if they can prove the crime provided for a need to survive.” This is the infamous “poverty defense.”

Herbold says that these defendants need to have an “opportunity to tell their stories” and allow the judges and juries “to hear their stories and make a decision based on the values of our city.” Sounds like spoiled children who cannot handle a teachers’ authority and have to “tell their side of things” when told simple commands in the schoolhouse, such as “sit down.”

The explanation for the “poverty defense” is explained by another on a Seattle television station. “In a situation where you took that sandwich because you were hungry and you were trying to meet your basic need of satisfying your hunger; we as the community will know that we should not punish that. That conduct is excused.”

Yet Lisa Herbold, being a government official, does not wish to live by the “values of her city.” When a man threw a rock through her house window, the councilwoman … yes … called the police. My Northwest reported that Herbold “was on the west side of the living room near the kitchen when she heard a loud noise that sounded like a gunshot and dove into the kitchen for cover.”

Not only is Lisa Herbold unable to see that no one wishes to live by Seattle’s valueless values—for a value does not respect persons rich or poor—but she herself refuses to abide by her own proposals. As a matter of fact, the entire city is seeing a huge spike in crime since the city of Seattle has approved an 18% cut to the Seattle Police Department. Consequently, murders have sky-rocketed. So much for Seattle’s take on values.

This is what occurs when you empty values of any meaningful content by excusing crime because of “poverty,” or organize to cut law enforcement.

Perhaps when Lisa Herbold phoned the police, she should have been told that the police that would have been sent was a part of the 18% cut and that she was on her own. And why call the police to begin with, Ms. Herbold? As Scott Lindsay, former mayoral Public Safety Advisor stated,” If you are engaged in 100 misdemeanors that are in our criminal justice system code, you are not going to be held liable. You are not going to be held accountable.”  So why call against a man committing a misdemeanor?

What do you wish the police to do, Lisa? Arrest the man so that you can gather your friends on the streets and harangue in front of the cameras about “police brutality” and moan about law enforcement harassing people over misdemeanors?

Pickled minds in Seattle.

Matt O’Brien: Mass Incarceration Remains a Myth, Mass Migration Is Still a Problem 0 (0)

Posted on by Leave a comment

by Matt O’Brien

The Intercept has published an article titled, “Immigration Detention Is Part of Mass Incarceration: The Case for Abolishing Ice and Everything Else.” It is, in essence a promotion piece for two unabashedly anti-Trump screeds: Migrating to Prison: America’s Obsession With Locking Up Immigrants, written by law professor César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández and All-American Nativism: How the Bipartisan War on Immigrants Explains Politics as We Know It, by Daniel Denvir.

Both authors argue that the Trump administration’s attempts to strengthen immigration enforcement are not intended to preserve American sovereignty and national security. Rather, they claim, Team Trump is exploiting systemic racism, fear of migrants and a “mass incarceration problem” that undermines civil rights in the United States. Moreover, both García Hernández and Denvir assert – against the weight of historical evidence – that only recently has the U.S. government begun to take immigration violations seriously.

But, even for The Intercept, which is unabashedly anti-Trump and pro-open-borders, touting such over-the-top hyperbole is a bit much. Neither García Hernández’ nor Denvir’s claims have any validity whatsoever.

To begin with, the United States in its relatively brief history has received more immigrants than all the other nations of the world combined. Clearly, we don’t have any fear of migrants. Not to mention that, since immigrants aren’t a race – they come from every corner of the globe – it’s patently ridiculous to claim that being broadly in favor of border enforcement renders someone a “racist.”

When it comes to the detention of lawbreakers, the U.S. isn’t even close to having a “mass incarceration problem.” As Rafael A. Mangual of the Manhattan Institute has pointed out, the U.S. does have a fair and impartial justice system. And that system regularly incarcerates violent felons and other serious criminals who pose a danger to the American public. What’s more, unlike many other countries in the world, the U.S. transparently reports the number of people it jails each year. Meanwhile, the notion that the U.S. regularly incarcerates people who simply don’t deserve to be in jail just isn’t supported by any objective data.

As far as the severity with which immigration offenses have been viewed throughout American history, both García Hernández and Denvir are way off base. In 1798, Congress passed the Alien Friends Act, which empowered the president to imprison or deport aliens believed to be “dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States.”

In 1799, in Frie’s Case, Supreme Justice James Iredell applied the Alien Friends Act and related legislation. He noted that no one had ever argued, “that aliens had a right to go into a foreign country, and stay at their will and pleasure without any leave from the government.” Justice Iredell’s statement is proof positive that even the earliest government officials believed that foreign nationals may enter and remain in the U.S. only with the permission of the Executive Branch. Furthermore, it’s a clear acknowledgement that the federal government has always had the authority to take enforcement actions against foreigners who enter the U.S. without permission or who exceed the bounds of permissions granted.

So, what’s up with The Intercept and the authors it cites? They believe that the actions of individuals are not a product of conscious choice. Instead, they see crime and illegal migration as things that people are forced into. And they consider anything other than total forgiveness for any type of criminal behavior to be immoral. It’s what Kurt Schlichter of Townhall.com calls “decriminalizing crime.” However, eliminating all restrictions on bad behavior only leads to chaos and the breakdown of the social order needed for the United States to remain successful.

American voters know that we don’t have a mass incarceration problem, we have an unchecked mass migration problem. That’s why they elected Donald Trump as president. He was the first candidate in five decades who seemed to understand their frustrations with immigration policies that put the desires of foreign nationals above American’s basic need for safety, security and economic stability.

IR: https://www.immigrationreform.com/2020/01/06/incarceration-illegal-immigration-criminals-immigrationreform-com/

Matt O’Brien joined the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in 2016. Matt is responsible for managing FAIR’s research activities. He also writes content for FAIR’s website and publications. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in French from the Johns Hopkins University and a Juris Doctor from the University of Maine School of Law.