ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, December 31, 2014

No heroes in New York City

The police are under no legal obligation to protect and serve you. And apparently, if they do not feel sufficiently lionized by the public, they will not even do their jobs.
Arrests plummet 66% with NYPD in virtual work stoppage. It’s not a slowdown — it’s a virtual work stoppage. NYPD traffic tickets and summonses for minor offenses have dropped off by a staggering 94 percent following the execution of two cops — as officers feel betrayed by the mayor and fear for their safety, The Post has learned.

The dramatic drop comes as Police Commissioner Bill Bratton and Mayor Bill de Blasio plan to hold an emergency summit on Tuesday with the heads of the five police unions to try to close the widening rift between cops and the administration.

It has helped contribute to a nose dive in low-level policing, with overall arrests down 66 percent for the week starting Dec. 22 compared with the same period in 2013, stats show. Citations for traffic violations fell by 94 percent, from 10,069 to 587, during that time frame. Summonses for low-level offenses like public drinking and urination also plunged 94 percent — from 4,831 to 300.

Even parking violations are way down, dropping by 92 percent, from 14,699 to 1,241. Drug arrests by cops assigned to the NYPD’s Organized Crime Control Bureau — which are part of the overall number — dropped by 84 percent, from 382 to 63.
If you still weren't convinced that the corrupt and militarized modern police of America are little more than a badge gang, I should think this obnoxious, irresponsible reaction by the police should suffice to convince you, at least concerning the feckless nature of the NYPD.

Recall that police work is not even among the ten most dangerous jobs in America; if it were, women would not pursue it. Remember that most officers never draw their gun nor fire it in the course of their career. And keep in mind that police departments intentionally screen to keep out the excessively intelligent and the insufficiently aggressive.

The petulance of the NYPD made me recall the Tom Simon essay in Sci Phi Journal #2, which concerned, among other things, Tolkien's definition of heroism.
In his essay “Ofermod,” Tolkien writes:

For this ‘northern heroic spirit’ is never quite pure; it is of gold and an alloy. Unalloyed it would direct a man to endure even death unflinching, when necessary: that is when death may help the achievement of some object of will, or when life can only be purchased by denial of what one stands for. But since such conduct is held admirable, the alloy of personal good name was never wholly absent.


These words describe Boromir exactly. To him, as to his father, the idea of the Good is limited to “the good of Gondor”; ultimately, to the good reputation of the Stewards and their house. Because Gondor, too, has much in it that is intrinsically good – there, too, folk spend much of their time growing food and eating it, and doing various kinds of service to one another – this remains a noble pursuit; but it is fatally flawed, for it mistakes the secondary good (the reputation of the guardians) for the primary.

Tolkien’s most direct criticism of this defective idea of virtue is put in the mouth of Faramir. He does not denigrate Boromir’s character directly, but he implicitly recognizes his flaws by making the distinction that Boromir missed, preferring the primary to the secondary good:

‘I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.’
The NYPD have made it clear that they love only themselves. They do not love that which they claim to protect and serve. Their idea of virtue is defective. They want to be regarded as heroes, but it is their very hunger for heroic status that renders genuine heroism forever beyond their reach.

Labels:

387 Comments:

1 – 200 of 387 Newer› Newest»
Blogger Eric December 31, 2014 8:37 AM  

Well said Vox.

Anonymous Mark Call December 31, 2014 8:45 AM  

NYC has become the poster child for the police state.

The Gangs of New York problem obviously dates way back. The Sullivan Act showed the world over a hundred years ago just how much contempt the city had for the Second Amendment, and more recently their "stop and frisk" abomination put a wooden stake through the Fourth.

Too bad it's hard to believe maybe a few of them just had an attack of conscience.

Blogger Joseph Dooley December 31, 2014 8:45 AM  

A few more weeks of this and New York will regain its 70s/80s rep as a cess pool. If democracy cannot be maintained without fellating the armed, uniformed union men, then it never existed to begin with. Let it burn.

Anonymous John Smallberries December 31, 2014 8:45 AM  

The fall off in minor (read: revenue-generating) citations is not necessarily out of fear for their safety or a shirking of responsibility. Rather, it's a direct message to the bureaucrats that the cops can put a dent in the revenue stream to which said bureaucrats are addicted unless they get the deference and perks to which they are accustomed.

Blogger Tank December 31, 2014 8:47 AM  

PR mistake for the cops. The same people who want to support them want the laws enforced.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 8:49 AM  

PR mistake for the cops. The same people who want to support them want the laws enforced.

They're letting everyone know who is in charge.

Give them tribute, or tax coffers will empty, shops will be robbed, people will be brutalized.

And they just so happen to have a disarmed public (for the most part).

Coincidence?

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 8:50 AM  

DC cops (especially) and other big city police departments are taking notice, to be sure.

Anonymous Nate Winchester December 31, 2014 8:52 AM  

Wait... hold on I'm confused.

with overall arrests down 66 percent for the week starting Dec. 22 compared with the same period in 2013, stats show.

Earlier Vox once said:
What they should do is disarm completely, stop playing soldier, abandon the concept of "law enforcement", and stop their confrontational tactics.

If arrests are down, then it would seem that police are abandoning the concept of law enforcement, which Vox said earlier they should do. Yeah the motivation may not be right and pure, but if the end result is the same... who cares?

I mean if we're concerned about a police state and all in america, how is it a bad thing for the police to not show up to work? One would think Star Wars would have been very different had all the stormtroopers gone on strike...

Anonymous VD December 31, 2014 8:59 AM  

Yeah the motivation may not be right and pure, but if the end result is the same... who cares?

You're confusing a tactic with a strategy. It won't lead to the same end result.

I mean if we're concerned about a police state and all in america, how is it a bad thing for the police to not show up to work?

Because it is temporary and shows their disregard for the law, for the elected authorities and for the public.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 9:00 AM  

I do not fault the police for wanting to live.

A disgruntled police force may be used as an agent for disorder, subversion, and regime change.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:01 AM  

Lmbo at the libertarian mental whiplash here. "Plz enforce laws according to my narrow vision of what law enforcement should be TIA".

2 edgy 4 me

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:05 AM  

A disgruntled police force may be used as an agent for disorder, subversion, and regime change.

As opposed to the situation in NYC now?

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:06 AM  

Jack et. al.,
I'd be less concerned about the police taking the day off if they didn't push, push, push to disarm people and leave them more helpless when the police decide to take a step back.

This is thuggery of another color.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 9:09 AM  

I see an opportunity here.

Anonymous Nate Winchester December 31, 2014 9:10 AM  

You're confusing a tactic with a strategy. It won't lead to the same end result.

Hmm.... fair enough. I politely disagree but from more of a "could end up the same" rather than a guarantee it won't.

Because it is temporary and shows their disregard for the law, for the elected authorities and for the public.

Ok so we can disdain them for personal morality, but this all works to a more libertarian end, no?

As I see it, until the higher ups back down and the longer it drags out two options will increase in chance of happening:
1) The public will rediscover the principle of self-sufficiency and pick up their guns to enforce their own communities.
2) The public (and maybe the authorities) will realize the people they've hired as police shouldn't have been and a cleansing of the department will happen with new hires. (and hopefully those new hires will of better caliber, though with modern culture... one wonders how much selection is available)

Want to make a friendly, gentlemen wager on how this plays out, Vox? ;) Should be fun to watch. (I'm sure other ilk will join in to vote for "all of NYC burned to the ground)

Anonymous Roundtine December 31, 2014 9:10 AM  

This is 4GW and the police are winning. This is exactly how the cops/military overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, they let crime increase and the govt was blamed because it was ineffective.

Left-wing power in America comes solely from the cities. Subvert the cities and you can subvert the left. This civil war would be over before it began if the police began acting to achieve political ends.

Anonymous Salt December 31, 2014 9:12 AM  

Vox is right as there is no virtue in what the police are doing. Unlike mobsters who will break your legs as enforcement, they are holding back, letting others do it till they again get their genuflected tribute.

Anonymous . December 31, 2014 9:13 AM  

They are not doing the things Vox said they should not do, but still he vomits on them...

Personally I'm laughing because the NYPD is sticking it to the city government exactly where it hurts them the most.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:14 AM  

For people that shout DISQUALIFY at the drop of a hat some of you are amazing IRT painting all police with the largest brush you can find.

But I'm totes sure this is a Machiavellian power play by the NYPD to show who's really in charge versus a survival response to being offered up as a sacrifice to de Blasio's greivance coalition.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 9:15 AM  

"This is 4GW and the police are winning. This is exactly how the cops/military overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, they let crime increase and the govt was blamed because it was ineffective."

Exactly. At least someone here is paying attention.

Blogger Chris Mallory December 31, 2014 9:15 AM  

"I do not fault the police for wanting to live."

They signed on for a "risky" job. If they do not want to take the risks and face the prospect of dying, then they are more than welcome to find honest work. But that would entail them leaving behind the bloated paychecks, platinum benefits, and early retirements.

Anonymous Strange Aeons December 31, 2014 9:15 AM  

@Nate Winchester " One would think Star Wars would have been very different had all the stormtroopers gone on strike..."
Probably, although the classic and original "I can't breathe" moment still transpired in the absence of stormtroopers.

/irrelevant

Blogger Bill Solomon December 31, 2014 9:16 AM  

No, what Tolkien meant by not pure was that it's never fully realized; Boromir's is not Northern courage, i.e. gold, but probably western courage, which If I had to describe would be the ability to face the unknown guns blazing. Aragorn's courage is northern. the kind that alllows you to hang onto a lifeline with bare hands during an avalanche in the antarctic. winter

Blogger Chris Mallory December 31, 2014 9:17 AM  

"painting all police with the largest brush you can find. "

They paint themselves with that broad brush. They wear uniforms to make themselves uniform. They stand behind their "blue wall of silence" to protect their "brothers". So fine. if they want to be gang members, then they should be treated like gang members.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:19 AM  

Gonna bet dollars to donuts that the above was posted from somewhere with the demographics of Martha's Vineyard vs Detroit.

Anonymous Salt December 31, 2014 9:20 AM  

The public will rediscover the principle of self-sufficiency and pick up their guns to enforce their own communities

One might hope, but if there were a time to test such that time could be now.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:20 AM  

Jack,
I really don't understand how you can't see this as different.

The police will go back to enforcing the laws as before.

The reason they're doing this is not to show less policing is better. They are using their work stoppage as leverage because they and the regimes have, for years, disarmed the public and intimidated people against taking action for themselves.

The police most definitely know the disarmed populace is vulnerable and are using it as a bargaining chip to gain greater control once this sideshow ends.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:20 AM  

Totally the response of a reasonable person and not an autist still mad at Dad/unable to identify what nuance is.

Anonymous Cryan Ryan December 31, 2014 9:21 AM  

This will get interesting as the bottom dwellers figure out they can urinate and defecate wherever they want, panhandle, commit strong arm robbery, slap people around, smoke weed openly, knock people out, etc etc...with no danger of being arrested.

There are probably a few Bernie Goetz's around though.

Ahhh...you don't look so bad...here's another....

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 9:22 AM  

If the regime that employs the police wants to wage war on them--a highly unusual situation to be sure--then we shouldn't fault the police for tactical maneuver.

OpenID cailcorishev December 31, 2014 9:23 AM  

I mean if we're concerned about a police state and all in america, how is it a bad thing for the police to not show up to work?

They're still showing up to work and collecting a paycheck. Refusal to make minor street arrests doesn't mean they won't play police state if the tax collectors send them to your house over an overdue filing. In fact, it may just give them more time for shaking down the citizens who (they think) are least likely to shoot back.

Anonymous Nate Winchester December 31, 2014 9:24 AM  

Probably, although the classic and original "I can't breathe" moment still transpired in the absence of stormtroopers.
/irrelevant


???? I don't follow. I thought Garner's death was directly tied to police (aka, the current, modern stormtrooper).

Or are you referring to a SW moment I have forgotten.

(though seriously, SW would have been hilarious if that were the case:
"You may fire when ready."
"Uh... sir? We can't."
"Why not?"
"Everybody's gone on strike, sir."
"Well son of a--"
*death star blows up*)

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:25 AM  

I really can't understand how you see the police as some sort of amorphous blue wall and are unable to identify that the current climate is in a response to the situation created by the judiciary and the legislators.

Instead you insist that law enforcmeent abide by a peculiar morality that only exists inside of Vox Populi.

But hey: saying "kill the cops" is edgy and cool while stating a desire to kill others responsible gets you unwanted attention.

Anonymous Porphyry December 31, 2014 9:25 AM  

"This is 4GW and the police are winning." you know what's worse for the legitimacy of the state than widespread rioting? Open insubordination by the enforcers of that legitimacy.

Anonymous Nate Winchester December 31, 2014 9:27 AM  

They're still showing up to work and collecting a paycheck. Refusal to make minor street arrests doesn't mean they won't play police state if the tax collectors send them to your house over an overdue filing. In fact, it may just give them more time for shaking down the citizens who (they think) are least likely to shoot back.

Hmmm... we'll see I guess. My money's still on government workers being lazy and generally preferring not having to bother if it would interfere with their porn time.

Anonymous Porphyry December 31, 2014 9:28 AM  

"I really can't understand how you see the police as some sort of amorphous blue wall" wait what? As far as I remember police is singular and in terms of function it's only significant parts are there to provide security. SO yes in every sense of the word they are an amorphous blue wall. Did you mean Police officers?

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:31 AM  

I see. Jack's just trolling and not serious.

Anonymous Porphyry December 31, 2014 9:32 AM  

"kill others responsible gets you unwanted attention." I myself wouldn't mind taking down Bush

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:32 AM  

I'm pretty sure that was obvious to anyone not looking to engage in spergy nitpicking.

Anonymous Stilicho December 31, 2014 9:32 AM  

If the regime that employs the police wants to wage war on them--a highly unusual situation to be sure--then we shouldn't fault the police for tactical maneuver.

Certainly not, but the tactic exposes the lie that the police institutionally recognize the concept of duty, much less follow it. They are simply another group of government employees who put their own interests ahead of the citizens' interests. Nor do the police put the the interests of the rest of the government ahead of their own. This state of affairs surprises both citizens and government officials. Sometimes those interests coincide, but it is foolish to think that they are the same.

However, I admit to enjoying the show as the Commissars and the NKVD fight amongst themselves.

Anonymous Strange Aeons December 31, 2014 9:32 AM  

I was tying Eric Garners "I can't breathe" moment to Vaders force choking, both at the hands of authority, but my reference was as clumsy as it was stupid (like coming out of hyperspace too soon. )

Anonymous Racialist Heretic December 31, 2014 9:34 AM  

My money's still on government workers being lazy and generally preferring not having to bother if it would interfere with their porn time.

As opposed to all those hard-working unemployed basement-dwellers and private-sector workers eschewing video games, sf/f, porn, and snack foods.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:34 AM  

Equating trolling as "anyone who disagrees with me" is up there as one of the more "rabbit" tactics, to use the parlance of this blog.

Anonymous Practice? We talkin' bout Practice? December 31, 2014 9:35 AM  

That is what entitled, psych needy, unionized, parasitic, armed revenue collectors come to. And that right quickly. No different than .gov teachers etal.

...with no danger of being arrested

This will only happen in a state and city where the people are intentionally disarmed.
Blacks are still scared sh*tless of whites, once whitey actually has had enough and snaps, with no pigs there to protect them.

Game on

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:36 AM  



It's apt. You are trolling. You post nonsense and deliberately avoid discourse as you continue to post insults.

Makes no difference to me.

I assume folks want honest discussion. Except when they troll, which is what you're doing.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:37 AM  

Is this where I type DISQUALIFY in all caps?

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:39 AM  

Sure.

Or you could address the counterpoints raised to your statements.

But I think you'll just continue to troll.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 9:41 AM  

Totally the response of a reasonable person and not an autist still mad at Dad/unable to identify what nuance is.

Good grief, is this Yama or Tad or one of the other obsessed stalkers? I lose track. Go away, little Jackie boy.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:41 AM  

Or is this where I type DISQUALIFY?

I'm honestly not sure how to approach your ridiculous strawmen, tbqh. I don't think you're as interested in honest dialogue as you are a pat on the head. If light mockery of your over the top hyperbole in between pointing out certain things gets you so worked up , the problem is likely with you.

Anonymous joe doakes December 31, 2014 9:42 AM  

Nice city you got there, be a shame if anything happened to it while you was bein' all disrespectful to the Dons what actually runs this burg.

.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 9:44 AM  

It also exposes the lie that the city has the force's back.

The police have a duty to protect the public; they don't have a duty to render themselves targets of state-sponsored street terrorists.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:46 AM  

Again, claiming anyone who disagrees is "trolling" comes off as rabbit warren behavior.

: /

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 9:46 AM  

Equating trolling as "anyone who disagrees with me" is up there as one of the more "rabbit" tactics, to use the parlance of this blog.

Now that's a straw man.

Anonymous Contaminated NEET December 31, 2014 9:46 AM  

Rather, it's a direct message to the bureaucrats that the cops can put a dent in the revenue stream to which said bureaucrats are addicted unless they get the deference and perks to which they are accustomed.

I've been wracking my brain about this all day, and you just answered it for me. How could the NYPD be stupid enough to think a drop-off in annoying, pointless, anarcho-tyrannical citations would make the public miss them at all? Obviously we're not the target; their true masters in the city bureaucracy are!

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:47 AM  

Nice city you got there, be a shame if anything happened to it while you was bein' all disrespectful to the Dons what actually runs this burg.

Precisely. This is the move of a protection racket looking for a better payout.

It can work in areas with low gun ownership and high per capita population of litigators.

In rural areas, the same low level police activity is in effect. It's not the Wild West in those areas.

The NYPD is HOPING for widespread violence and ruin because they have worked with the politicians to gain the monopoly on power in the city.

Anonymous Stilicho December 31, 2014 9:48 AM  

The police have a duty to protect the public

No, they don't. You can argue that they should have such a duty, but the fact is that neither the law nor the police recognize any such duty.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:49 AM  

It also exposes the lie that the city has the force's back.

The police have a duty to protect the public; they don't have a duty to render themselves targets of state-sponsored street terrorists.


LBF,
I don't disagree. I think the mayor's office acted horribly.

I just don't see the police actions as any better. In fact, they're worse because they know darn well that their inaction is putting millions at risk.

Blogger Chris Mallory December 31, 2014 9:50 AM  

"I really can't understand how you see the police as some sort of amorphous blue wall and are unable to identify that the current climate is in a response to the situation created by the judiciary and the legislators."

So, they are "just following orders"? If they were men of honor, they would resign rather than become jack booted thugs. But they want to be jack booted thugs.

I live in an area that is still mostly white, the cops are still thugs. They want to be jackbooted thugs. The first thing the sheriff did when he was elected was to do away with the old tan uniforms, replacing them with snazzy black outfits. The only thing they are missing is the dual thunderbolts on the collars. "Protect and Serve" on the side of the patrol cars was replaced with "Professionalism". The white cars were painted black. They want to be jackbooted thugs.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 9:51 AM  

NYC has become the poster child for the police state.

It will be interesting to see what happens when their behavior spills over to the upscale neighborhoods of Manhattan. So far it seems the misconduct has been isolated to the 'hood, as it were.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:52 AM  

They want to be jackbooted thugs.

I wouldn't go that far, but it does remind me of the line from The Departed.

"They signed up to use that gun."

Blogger Chris Mallory December 31, 2014 9:52 AM  

"they don't have a duty to render themselves targets of state-sponsored street terrorists."

That is why we pay them the bloated salaries. Taking the risk and making themselves targets is the job.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:52 AM  

Except when it's not. Its pretty much the epitome of "purge the badthink!" response.

Seriously, while VD is an intellectual heavyweight a lot of you are good for posting "Me too!" and not much else. Guess where you are?

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 9:54 AM  

Isn't the sheriff an elected official?

Anonymous VD December 31, 2014 9:54 AM  

Again, claiming anyone who disagrees is "trolling" comes off as rabbit warren behavior.

Agreed. Hyperbole, hysteria, and rhetorical exaggeration for effect are not trolling.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:54 AM  

Troll hates being ignored....

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 9:54 AM  

To certain types of individuals, the police are always in the wrong.

Enforcing the law is "over-policing".

Easing up on enforcing the law is a "direct threat to democracy".

We see this exposed here.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 9:57 AM  

Easing up on enforcing the law is a "direct threat to democracy".

LBF,
If you work to actively disarm the population so it can't adequately defend itself and then step back and refuse to provide the protection you swore you would provide, you have introduced a direct threat to public safety.

Anonymous Fran December 31, 2014 9:58 AM  

NYPD is obviously hitting the deblasio administration where it hurts the most...The city is losing serious cash from petty fines and that can't be good for the current left wing administration. I got no probs with that. I say that believing that they are still going after more violent crimes...if they even ever really did that. After all, it's this mayor and council that set all these laws they expect the cops to enforce.
Laws like search and frisk and enforcing cigarette tax laws to the point of physical assault...that's the politicians making those laws.

Blogger Vox December 31, 2014 9:58 AM  

Seriously, while VD is an intellectual heavyweight a lot of you are good for posting "Me too!" and not much else. Guess where you are?

That doesn't make them rabbits. It's entirely possible for non-rabbits to agree with something without necessarily being able to successfully articulate the case.

Rabbitology concerns in-group, out-group behavior. It's related to the subject you've raised, but it's not identical. Also, few commenters are as patient and methodical as I am, which is why they are typically unable to respond as effectively. They're often trying to leap three or four steps in a single comment, which doesn't tend to work very well.

I mean, I often know that someone is an idiot when I begin addressing him, but it's much more effective to DEMONSTRATE that he is an idiot than to call him one. The only people I call idiots right away are those I have repeatedly demonstrated to be idiots already. Well, I suppose that sometimes I do it as punctuation after a demonstration, but you get the point.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 10:00 AM  

Taking the risk and making themselves targets is the job.

Again, we're in a highly unusual, irregular situation, reminiscent of some kind of civil war.

Making themselves open targets of street terrorists aided and abetted by the very regime that employs them probably isn't in the job description.

I don't fault the police for taking this tactical maneuver.

Blogger Nate Winchester December 31, 2014 10:02 AM  

I was tying Eric Garners "I can't breathe" moment to Vaders force choking, both at the hands of authority, but my reference was as clumsy as it was stupid (like coming out of hyperspace too soon. )

I find your lack of referencing disturbing... *point*

;) now I got ya.

Hmm... star wars act 1: "Your sad devotion to that ancient religion..." -maybe that guy was more like our current "elite" than we initially thought.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 10:02 AM  

If you work to actively disarm the population so it can't adequately defend itself and then step back and refuse to provide the protection you swore you would provide, you have introduced a direct threat to public safety.

It's the city government that's responsible for this state of affairs, not the police.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 10:02 AM  

I don't fault the police for taking this tactical maneuver.

LBF,
What, precisely, is the NYPD's end game?

A statement from the mayor's office? Will that take the target off their back? Maybe firing some folks. Will that make their job safer?

What tangible change do they expect to accomplish that couldn't be accomplished while providing protection they swore to provide to a population that cannot provide the protection, due to government regulation?

Blogger JartStar December 31, 2014 10:03 AM  

The problem with NYPDs strategy here is someone still has to pay them. The mayor and city council could just defund them if they aren't doing their jobs, and replace them. If the USA is heading towards tribalism then I suspect that large police unions with little accountability will be defunded and the various communities within a city or the suburbs will fund their own police making them "our guys". In this way they will turn into true "police gangs" supported by the local population.

There's a long history of this in the US, especially during the Old West era where rival law men acted as gangs, and organizations like the Pinkertons were hired by towns and businessmen to enforce the rule of law.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 10:05 AM  

I don't speak for NYPD, but getting de Blasio out would probably be a start.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 10:05 AM  

Fair enough point. It just seems there is a tendency here to jump down the throats with one off dismissive comments and immediately running to fly the troll/Yama flag. Especially if the person commenting isn't a regular.

I'd add that a sign of rabbitry is the demand for total ideoligical alignment in all things. I can disagree with you here, but still find that you make valid points in other areas. I'd say some of the commentariat here hasn't learned that lesson.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 10:05 AM  

Troll hates being ignored....

Very true. Good point.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 10:07 AM  

the various communities within a city or the suburbs will fund their own police making them "our guys". In this way they will turn into true "police gangs" supported by the local population.

Yes, this will happen. I've actually been floating the idea of police departments forming white volunteer auxiliary units to target black, SJW protestors.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 10:07 AM  

It's the city government that's responsible for this state of affairs, not the police.

C'mon. You're telling me the NYPD hasn't pushed for stronger gun laws in NYC?

Link Let's see what the longest serving chief of NYPD has to say:

"And most of the talk is about assault weapons. It's a good thing, don't get me wrong. I think they have to be greatly restricted. But it's not going to have a significant impact on the streets of New York. I think we'll see a lot of rhetoric. I don't think we'll see much of significance coming out of Congress. I hope I'm wrong."

Kelly said he supported Michael Bloomberg's federal gun control agenda, was supportive of Andrew Cuomo's proposed assault weapons ban, and looked forward to seeing the forthcoming gun-control recommendations from Vice President Joe Biden.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 10:09 AM  

I don't speak for NYPD, but getting de Blasio out would probably be a start.

NYC loves their liberal mayors. (Giuliani was a bit of an anomaly.) They might vote de Blasio out eventually but they'll in all likelihood elect someone just as liberal in his stead.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 10:12 AM  

I don't speak for NYPD, but getting de Blasio out would probably be a start.

Fine by me.

But it's not like the thugs who shoot cops are going to suddenly put away their hatred if he leaves and suddenly renounce violence.

What does the NYPD think they can accomplish by doing this that they couldn't do by continuing to provide the protection they swore to provide to a vulnerable public? At this point, the question is really "food for thought" until they articulate their end game.

Anonymous MH December 31, 2014 10:14 AM  

I understand that there is corruption in the police force and this is a problem. However, there is another problem, which is that the police are constantly criticized as evil and racist literally no matter what they do. If they kill a minority, whether it is justified (Mike Brown?) or not (Eric Gardner?), it is evil and racist either way. If they don't kill anyone and merely arrest lawbreakers, it is still evil and racist, because the Left literally says that the mere fact that there are more minorities than whites in prison is evidence of racism. If they refrain from doing their job, they are cowards or are selfishly abandoning the (mostly minority) population they are supposed to protect, which is also evil and racist because they don't care enough about disproportionate crime rates affecting minorities. There is literally nothing the police can do that will not get them criticized by the powers that be. They tolerate this if there are enough people who stand up for them, but their own (even more corrupt) boss de Blasio basically joined the critics, and they're doing this to send a message to him, not necessarily to the public. Notice that it's mainly minor offenses (traffic violations, inappropriate public behavior, drug offenses) that are being ignored; they're not going completely AWOL. This is a response to the relentless "racist" criticism of the Left and their superiors, not the "corrupt" criticism, which although valid, is something completely different.

Blogger Salt December 31, 2014 10:15 AM  

I think it's getting to where only DeBlasio's resignation will suffice, and being replaced with one who tows the blue line. Discussion of what constitutes ~unethical police behavior is seen as unpatriotic, holding police accountable for their actions; all police actions being deemed necessary, thus appropriate.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 10:16 AM  

Except what happened was weak "me too!" style arguments got exposed and you with a few others ran to disqualify by calling anyone who disagreed with you as a troll.

Yikes. I'd try to reinvent history too.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 10:17 AM  

The 'state of affairs' was a reference to the city government directly creating a threat to public safety by forcing the police to take this maneuver.

It's legislature that makes the law, not the security forces.

NYC is hardly a police state. (And I say that as someone who has spent years in or near the city since the 1970s).

Blogger Nate December 31, 2014 10:19 AM  

'Arrests plummet 66% with NYPD in virtual work stoppage. It’s not a slowdown — it’s a virtual work stoppage. NYPD traffic tickets and summonses for minor offenses have dropped off by a staggering 94 percent following the execution of two cops — as officers feel betrayed by the mayor and fear for their safety, The Post has learned."

Wait...

So you're bitching because the NYPD did the smart thing? They've stopped harassing the public and have stopped filling the mayors coffers with the public's coin.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 10:19 AM  

But it's not like the thugs who shoot cops are going to suddenly put away their hatred if he leaves and suddenly renounce violence.

Agreed. The city government has created a civil war-type situation. It's going to be difficult to root out the insurgents. I've argued that the police should recruit plains-clothed white auxiliaries to target these street terrorists.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 10:19 AM  

There is literally nothing the police can do that will not get them criticized by the powers that be.

They pushed to disarm the people, despite a clear constitutional right.

They ensured they have a monopoly on force in the city.

They are now leveraging and placing in jeopardy the safety of fellow citizens to get some type of tribute.

Had they not pushed for the gun laws or harsh sentences for non-violent weapon offenses, I think I'd be FAR more sympathetic to their cause.

As it stands, though, this is no different than a protection gang letting an accomplice smash vases in a nice business.

Blogger Salt December 31, 2014 10:22 AM  

Doing the smart thing was an unintended consequence of doing for the wrong reason(s), Nate.

Blogger John Wright December 31, 2014 10:23 AM  

"Not sufficiently lionized" is an odd way to describe the Mayor's office urging on the rioters, spreading the slander that White cops are killing Black men at random, and undermining the police officer's ability to do their jobs at all.

Vox, you seem to believe the r/K theory to explain politics on every other topic but this. The rabbits hate the police and seek to hinder the police and aid the forces of crime, anarchy and riot in order to increase the violence in society in order again to weed out the alphas, who are their main competition for does.

Why do you not see the manifestation of the r/K theory at work here?

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 10:23 AM  

They are now leveraging and placing in jeopardy the safety of fellow citizens to get some type of tribute.

No. The police are making a tactical maneuver to not get killed by terrorists aided and abetted by the very government that employs them.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 10:28 AM  

You're doing good work and making serious points here. Some people won't put down the Ice Cube though no matter what happens.

The police will always be wrong because muh liberties.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey December 31, 2014 10:28 AM  

So you're bitching because the NYPD did the smart thing? They've stopped harassing the public and have stopped filling the mayors coffers with the public's coin.

What makes it even more amusing is de Blasio himself campaigned on a promise to put an end to 'stop-and-frisk' tactics that apparently angered the city's criminal element so much.

NYPD ...damned if you do, damned if you don't.

OpenID cailcorishev December 31, 2014 10:33 AM  

This will get interesting as the bottom dwellers figure out they can urinate

I've never been to NYC, but friends who have been there tell stories of seeing men pissing in the street, being grabbed and hassled by panhandlers, etc. I thought this stuff was already going on. So now that the cops are having a hissy fit, it's going to....continue? How scary.

Anonymous VD December 31, 2014 10:35 AM  

Fair enough point. It just seems there is a tendency here to jump down the throats with one off dismissive comments and immediately running to fly the troll/Yama flag. Especially if the person commenting isn't a regular.

Naturally, since Yama has been trolling here for 52 months, Tad for nearly that long, and before that, Phoenician, Obvious, Bearded Spock, and others. The regulars have become accustomed to new identities showing up and completely failing to engage in any rational discourse. You can hardly expect them to distinguish perfectly between a genuine new critic and one of the long-time anklebiters who is attempting to present himself as a genuine new critic.

I'd add that a sign of rabbitry is the demand for total ideoligical alignment in all things. I can disagree with you here, but still find that you make valid points in other areas. I'd say some of the commentariat here hasn't learned that lesson.

I don't think you're being quite fair to the commentariat here. No one here, literally no one, expects, much less demands, total ideological alignment in all things. There isn't a single person who agrees with me on every idea I put forth, because my opinions are not perfectly consistent over time; I do change my mind from time to time. There is a wide range of disagreement on this very issue, from strongly pro-police to strongly anti-police. My moderately anti-police position is probably in the minority here.

However, it should be noted that the mere fact that one is engaging in rational discourse and directly answering questions means that one is not a troll, much less one of the usual suspects. Also, it is a little strange to accuse regulars of being rabbits when their positions are visibly not in accord with mine.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 10:35 AM  

So you're bitching because the NYPD did the smart thing? They've stopped harassing the public and have stopped filling the mayors coffers with the public's coin.

They're going to go back to doing it after they generate enough fear in the public or get what they want (whatever it is) from the mayor's office.

This isn't a philosophical shift the NYPD is making. And it will be short lived.

Why applaud what is clearly just a negotiation tactic?

Anonymous The other skeptic December 31, 2014 10:37 AM  

OT, but the craze to teach kids to program using computer games continues:

New Minecraft Modding Software Revolutionizes the Way We Teach Kids Coding

Anonymous Sam the Man December 31, 2014 10:37 AM  

I think it is fair to say that Jack Hanson is not a troll; he just has a different cant on these events and has the courage to put forward a opinion that is not popular on this site. That said while he has brought up a reasonable point, what do you expect the police to do? It was a reasonable interpretation that the city administration was hostile to the police was it not? Those who disagree with Jack’s point should be intellectually honest enough to admit there is a legitimate issue with how the major acted prior to the dual police shooting. There are two sides to this

That said, Jack could you clarify a few views of your, just so we know where you care coming from, I would ask you to answer these as I think it would clarify where you are coming from:

1) Do you accept that police work is not one of the most dangerous occupations, yes or no?


2) Do you think that the increasing trend of militarization of police is reasonable, yes or no?


3) Do you see police as civilians, yes or no?


4) Do you agree that police should have access to small arms that the regular citizens should be denied, yes or no?


5) Can you see, given the trends in law enforcement/police in the last 20 years, why productive citizens would be suspicious of police having more power, yes of no?

OpenID cailcorishev December 31, 2014 10:41 AM  

I really can't understand how you see the police as some sort of amorphous blue wall and are unable to identify that the current climate is in a response to the situation created by the judiciary and the legislators.

The cops are not innocent bystanders in that climate. How many cops have ever stood up and said, "Hey, you guys are passing too many frivolous laws, wasting our time chasing around after victimless crimes when we should be dealing with real criminals"? None, of course, because more frivolous laws means job security, and safer job security at that.

We see them as an "amorphous blue line" because that's how they present themselves and how they act towards us. I've had cop friends that I got along with, but I never had any doubt about where their ultimate loyalty lay, or which side they would be on if it were ever me versus the blue line.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 10:46 AM  

We see them as an "amorphous blue line" because that's how they present themselves and how they act towards us. I've had cop friends that I got along with, but I never had any doubt about where their ultimate loyalty lay, or which side they would be on if it were ever me versus the blue line.

I also think not all PDs are the same. I live in a town that has resisted assimilation into a regional police force, precisely because they want to patrol their own streets and not have outsiders who don't know the townies to answer calls. And, yeah, I also know that if push came to shove, they're on their side and I'm on the outside.

There's a big difference between low-activity law enforcement (my town) in which the population has a history of being allowed to arm and defend yourself and low activity law enforcement as a negotiation tactic against a population that has had protection rights restricted (often with the support of the police).

I want low activity law enforcement.

I want my right to defend myself and my family untouched.

If the state takes or limits my rights, then it better damn sure provide 24/7 security without a hiccup.

That's the problem I see here.

Anonymous Steve Canyon December 31, 2014 10:49 AM  

Since I've started reading On War, the NYPD/DeBlasio affair is fascinating from a standpoint of which side is doing a better job of delegitimizing the state and how this will spill over to other parts of the US.

Anonymous Nate Winchester December 31, 2014 10:49 AM  

I'll answer for myself, Sam the Man.

1) Do you accept that police work is not one of the most dangerous occupations, yes or no?

Currently? No, though it is one of the few jobs where the danger is entirely dependent on other people. Actions taken today (i.e. important criminals) could make the job more dangerous or safer tomorrow and historically it might be different.

2) Do you think that the increasing trend of militarization of police is reasonable, yes or no?

No, and I blame a lot of legislators for it happening. Though it is a riddle: if gangs, mobs, etc are becoming more militarized, what should be done? Making the police more like the military or involving the military in more police work? I really don't know.

3) Do you see police as civilians, yes or no?

Yes.

4) Do you agree that police should have access to small arms that the regular citizens should be denied, yes or no?

No. Not for any reason that I can see, especially if they are supposed to be civilians.

5) Can you see, given the trends in law enforcement/police in the last 20 years, why productive citizens would be suspicious of police having more power, yes of no?

Yes but that's confusing the symptom for the disease. Banning police to stop out of control power-hunger is like banning guns to stop crime.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 10:50 AM  

I don't think you're being quite fair to the commentariat here. No one here, literally no one, expects, much less demands, total ideological alignment in all things.

Many of the new commenters here start off with the same old bag of rhetorical tricks they've used on lesser blogs and are shocked when we immediately call them out on it. They cry "intolerance!" But they're mistaking intolerance of their rhetorical style with an intolerance of their ideas.

Anonymous Nate Winchester December 31, 2014 10:53 AM  


The cops are not innocent bystanders in that climate. How many cops have ever stood up and said, "Hey, you guys are passing too many frivolous laws, wasting our time chasing around after victimless crimes when we should be dealing with real criminals"? None, of course, because more frivolous laws means job security, and safer job security at that.


How do you know "none"? Maybe it's just your area but I've frequently heard complaints about some of the "dumb ass laws" they're having to enforce. They hate wasting time like IT specialists hate being called in because you forgot to turn on your monitor.

Blogger Salt December 31, 2014 10:53 AM  

It was a reasonable interpretation that the city administration was hostile to the police was it not?

Take Stop and Frisk. That's a policy DeBlasio is hostile to. The cops probably like it, as it's empowering. DeBlasio is hostile to an amount of police power which the blue line sees as hostile to them.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:00 AM  

Sam,

1) No. High tension linemen have it infinitely worst than I ever will as law enforcement. Forget that job.

2) It depends where you're at. The patrol tactics of my small town, where 99% of the calls are DV/nuisance complaints involving officers stepping out of their rides with M4 magazines shingle pouched on hard plate body armor annoy me to no end. However you're not going to patrol Detroit the same way you're going to patrol Cody, Wyoming.

3) Yes. "We are not the military" is an argument I've had plenty with my management when they pull that "paramilitary" BS. I've been there, and this isn't it.

4) Nope.

5) Understandable, but also look at the massive shift in society as well. You think the increased powers caused the shift, or the shift caused the increased need for powers.

Mind, the same people who deride the police for engaging in broken windows style policing often also bitch about why the police don't do something about all these bums in the same breath.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:04 AM  

"Many of the new commenters here start off with the same old bag of rhetorical tricks they've used on lesser blogs and are shocked when we immediately call them out on it. They cry "intolerance!" But they're mistaking intolerance of their rhetorical style with an intolerance of their ideas."

I'm not calling intolerance. I'm just pointing out you're rabbiting when your "call out" consists of "lookit dis troll".

Blogger John Wright December 31, 2014 11:04 AM  

"Making the police more like the military or involving the military in more police work? I really don't know."

I know. As your helpful lawyer on the blog I can tell you the name of the law which forbids using the military to carry out policing is called the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.

Please note that in order to allow military units to attack and burn the children and adults in the Waco compound, the BATF had to perjure itself, and claim that the Christians there were guilty of drug violations. Evildoers in our government unwisely and malignantly created an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act, allowing the military to fight the 'war on drugs.'

The resulting massacre is a matter of historical record, as is the fact that the guilty parties were not only never charged, they were lionized. The BATF was not disbanded; Janet Reno was not hanged.

Worse of all, the Posse Comitatus Act has not been restored to its original intent and integrity, nor is their any politician of any party speaking publicly of doing so.

No matter my personal disagreements with them in other areas, I pray for the Libertarians to win all elections in landslides if only they can restore our republic to us, and save us from the smothering nanny-tyranny of the Pharisee State.

Anonymous Stilicho December 31, 2014 11:05 AM  

DeBlasio is hostile to an amount of police power which the blue line sees as hostile to them.

Say, rather, that DeBlasio is hostile to police power that he does not control or police power that is directed at groups that he does not want it directed at. If the NYPD's blatantly unconstitutional stop and frisk policy were directed at white conservatives, DeBlasio would be its biggest supporter. Who/whom is always a factor with leftists.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 11:05 AM  

It was a reasonable interpretation that the city administration was hostile to the police was it not?

Absolutely.

That said while he has brought up a reasonable point, what do you expect the police to do?

They already have the means to address the problem(s). They have five unions. They have effective mouth pieces. They have federal, state, and local legislators and a good deal of the public sympathetic to their current cause.

Go to work. Do the job you are paid to do and swore to do.

Request more defensive measures. Increases in overtime to ensure more backup available for at least six months. Stronger body armor. Changes along those lines.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:06 AM  

Owen,

And I want a flying unicorn. Some of us learned to accept that we don't always get what we want in an inperfect world vs. demanding our ideal metrics or else the whole system needs to be torn down.

Anonymous JCB December 31, 2014 11:07 AM  

If this turns out to be more than a short term stunt, the mayor could respond by eliminating police OT, instituting furloughs, etc. Police are bureaucrats too, which is why I don't think this will last very long.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 11:10 AM  

If this turns out to be more than a short term stunt, the mayor could respond by eliminating police OT, instituting furloughs, etc. Police are bureaucrats too, which is why I don't think this will last very long.

Good point. The badge gang can be pressured economically, too. Victory will go to the side that really wants to play hardball.

OpenID cailcorishev December 31, 2014 11:11 AM  

It's possible that a strict police state is the only way for a multicultural city containing millions of people to function without massive violence. Good for them, I guess, as long as I don't have to live there. The only problem is, their methods tend to spill out on the rest of us.

In my rural area, where as far as I know no cop has ever been killed in the line of duty (cutting your own firewood or hunting your own meat is far more dangerous), we now have SWAT teams, cops in military gear and armored vehicles, and metal detectors in public buildings -- because people in big cities think that stuff is necessary. Maybe it is there, but now we have it too.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 11:11 AM  

I'm not calling intolerance. I'm just pointing out you're rabbiting when your "call out" consists of "lookit dis troll".

You came into the thread, threw bombs, and never made an effort to articulate an argument or address others who drove a truck through your position. Scrolling through the early part of the thread, there's not much to distinguish your posts from the garden variety crank, looking to stir up the emotional volume in a thread.

Maybe in other threads you had meaningful discourse, but what would you describe posts like these:

Lmbo at the libertarian mental whiplash here. "Plz enforce laws according to my narrow vision of what law enforcement should be TIA".

2 edgy 4 me

For people that shout DISQUALIFY at the drop of a hat some of you are amazing IRT painting all police with the largest brush you can find.

But I'm totes sure this is a Machiavellian power play by the NYPD to show who's really in charge versus a survival response to being offered up as a sacrifice to de Blasio's greivance coalition.

Totally the response of a reasonable person and not an autist still mad at Dad/unable to identify what nuance is.

But hey: saying "kill the cops" is edgy and cool while stating a desire to kill others responsible gets you unwanted attention.

I'm pretty sure that was obvious to anyone not looking to engage in spergy nitpicking.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:11 AM  

VD,

If I'm not fair to your commentariat its because many of them stand on your shoulders and declare that they're giants as well. But that's like anywhere else - good commenters/bad commenters no matter where you go.

Anonymous The other skeptic December 31, 2014 11:14 AM  

I think that the police union in NYC have made a mistake in letting the police take this action. It allows DeBlasio to replace the police with people more to his and the mobs liking.

NYC may well just have started down the road to Detroit.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:15 AM  

Owen,

You should read what VD said about rhetoric, hyperbole, and hysteria versus doubling down on "u trollin". You argue that people "drove a truck through my positions" right after declaring I made no arguments or did anything but throw bombs.

So which is it? How can I have a position for you to blow through with your razor sharp pioneer he-man logic if all I did was troll? Or AGAIN, maybe rewording an argument and basically posting "me too!" isn't as strong an argument as you believe it is?

Anonymous Porky December 31, 2014 11:16 AM  

Some people won't put down the Ice Cube though no matter what happens.

Speaking of ice.... today, Dec 31st 2014, the polar ice caps set an all-time record for sea ice.

Nothing like a good ice age to cool down flaring tempers.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:16 AM  

TOS,

NYC is too important to the Masters of the Universe to allow it to go the way of Detroit. It'll never happen.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 11:16 AM  

And I want a flying unicorn. Some of us learned to accept that we don't always get what we want in an inperfect world vs. demanding our ideal metrics or else the whole system needs to be torn down.

Where did I suggest anything that is fantasy? Unreasonable?

I said:

Either let me defend myself

or

If the government is going to restrict my ability to defend myself, then it is the government's responsibility to provide the protection.

The problem I noted from early on is that the enforcement arm of the government restricted the rights of the population to defend itself and has now decided to arbitrarily provide the protection it swore to provide.

What's worse, it is done not due to a change in philosophy (less policing to increase freedoms), but as a bargaining chip to gain something unarticulated from the mayor's office.

That's thuggery. I can support my local police without having the blinders on to thuggery.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 11:17 AM  

You argue that people "drove a truck through my positions" right after declaring I made no arguments or did anything but throw bombs.

You can state a position without making an argument.

Anonymous Roundtine December 31, 2014 11:18 AM  

Diversity + Equality = Police Militarization

Anonymous zen0 December 31, 2014 11:21 AM  

The cops have been working without a contract since August 2010. Labor negotiations have gone to arbitration. This is the background of the whole issue.

There was a illegal cop strike in 1971 over a pay issue. All the sound and fury seems merely a negotiation tactic.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/lack-contract-adds-blaz-nypd-conflict-article-1.2060239

Blogger LP 999/Eliza December 31, 2014 11:21 AM  

This is wonderful, wait, brain freeze, who is going to enforce the law and protect the people in a gunless half sane city?

Easily predicable (ab)normal reaction from RCC's, Protestants, Irish, Asian, Italian, etc., to a questionable usurping mayor of an obnoxious city from a state that is NOT part of America anymore. Revenue raising, hide the decline, promote authority worship, keep the tribe happy and that's NYC.However, risking a pension and union job isn't bold. All that fake worship and loyalty is just as fake as 9/11.

Anonymous The other skeptic December 31, 2014 11:22 AM  

NYC is too important to the Masters of the Universe to allow it to go the way of Detroit. It'll never happen.

So how will we know that corrective action has been taken by the Masters of the Universe?

Will they ease De Blasio out?

What if they wait too long before seeing where things are going? What if they actually believe the diversity nonsense?

OpenID cailcorishev December 31, 2014 11:22 AM  

I've frequently heard complaints about some of the "dumb ass laws" they're having to enforce.

Every employee complains sometimes about the more annoying aspects of his job. Find me a cop who spoke out publicly (not office bitching) against the proliferation of victimless, revenue-generating crimes. Find me a cop who took a stand against the increasing militarization and use of force in arrests where there is no resistance. And since we're constantly told that the problem isn't with the rank and file cops, but with "corruption," find me a whistleblower. Preferably one who's still alive and wasn't driven out of his job.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:25 AM  

Owen,

Demanding your ideal metrics or else the whole system needs to be torn down is the activity of a teenager mad because authority can't see that he is a special snowflake who doesn't need the same rules everyone else does. Calling it "thuggery" is engaging in hyperbole (but NOT trolling). Furthermore, I highly suspect no one is keeping you from defending your family, unless you're insisting that only a mortar or a tank will do the job. If your locality annoys you that much, what exactly is stopping you from leaving?

"You can state a position without making an argument."

If you're engaging in sophistry you're basically conceding the point.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 11:26 AM  

The cops have been working without a contract since August 2010. Labor negotiations have gone to arbitration. This is the background of the whole issue.

Ahh, if that's the case, then I think we're getting to the real reason for the work stoppage. Now we see what they're angling for from the mayor's office.

They are using the deaths to force the hand in negotiations. No, I'm not so cynical to suggest they aren't P/Od at the mayor for what he did or that turning their backs was motivated by the lack of contract vs. the murder of two cops.

But this answers the question I have had since this started. What do they want to gain from this move?

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:27 AM  

TOS,

In retrospect, you may be right on that one. Not sure how much they've drank the diversity kool aid to be honest with you.

How does it pan out? Man your guess is as good as mine.

Anonymous paradox December 31, 2014 11:27 AM  

I can't understand why the right wants to venerate the NYPD. The same group who has no reservations about them turning in their firearms. Well until now, a confiscation order would scare the blue bacon into early retirement.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 11:31 AM  

But this answers the question I have had since this started. What do they want to gain from this move?

The age-old answer: follow the money.

Anonymous Big Bill December 31, 2014 11:31 AM  

I applaud the New York City Police! They are not "refusing to do their jobs", they are acceding to the Will of the People. The People are telling the police that stopping, frisking, and writing tickets to poor people (blacks, browns and yellows) are racial oppression.

Mayor De Blasio agrees and publicly sympathizes with the People. In fact, and according to the mayor, the mayor's own son lives in fear of the police. That is awful!

The People wish to return to Mayor Lindsay, Mayor Koch and Mayor Dinkins-level of policing and they are getting what they have begged for. No more routine, penny-ante racial profiling and enforcement of nasty laws that (let's be honest here) have a massively disparate impact on People of Color.

It is out of respect to the People that the New York City Police Department is dropping its petty harassment of the People for the tens of thousands of victimless crimes (parking tickets, noise, trash, etc.) Enough with the racist "Broken Windows" harassment!

It is sad that the People had to execute two cops to get their message across, but such is life. What is important is that the NYPD is listening.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 11:32 AM  

Demanding your ideal metrics or else the whole system needs to be torn down is the activity of a teenager mad because authority can't see that he is a special snowflake who doesn't need the same rules everyone else does. Calling it "thuggery" is engaging in hyperbole (but NOT trolling).

Please show where I stated or implied any system must be torn down.

If you cannot, I expect an apology and retraction.

Because I've never suggested such a thing.

Furthermore, I highly suspect no one is keeping you from defending your family, unless you're insisting that only a mortar or a tank will do the job. If your locality annoys you that much, what exactly is stopping you from leaving?

I'm not sure if you're deliberately mis-reading or just obtuse.

I like where I live. I like the police where I live. I'm allowed to purchase firearms and have an unlimited amount of firearms and ammunition in my house.

My local police practice limited law enforcement, resisted the payout associated with the regional police force to keep it a "small town police force," and generally allow fellow citizens to live their lives without the presence of police.

If you're engaging in sophistry you're basically conceding the point.

Since there's no argument in any of those posts and only a string of invectives and muddled positions, I think you've conceded my point.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 11:34 AM  

If I'm not fair to your commentariat its because many of them stand on your shoulders and declare that they're giants as well.

Okay guys, who's been standing on Vox's shoulders again? Porky? Salt? zen0? C'mon, fess up.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:38 AM  

Owen,

You should stop throwing out words that you have the basest idea of what they mean. Furthermore when you're disparaging the whole system of policing and then offering two metrics that need to be met for your approval of said system, you're pretty much demanding that in so many words. The spergy nitpicking is pretty obvious. I wouldn't hold my breath for an apology.

Not sure where I'm misreading where you're demanding the right to "defend your family" right there, with the implicit inference that where you live you think you're unable to. Which is pretty reasonable, unless this is some sort of weak "Gotcha!" two step.

Again like I said, sophistry & conceding the point. You were better off just yelling "trolly troll troll troll".

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:39 AM  

Okay guys, who's been standing on Vox's shoulders again? Porky? Salt? zen0? C'mon, fess up.

Unfunny sarcasm is totally the way to show that you're not 100% bothered by this statement.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 11:48 AM  

You made an accusation more than once, were asked to back it up, and couldn't. I never disparaged "the whole system of policing" and, in fact, showed my support for a real and effective style of policing. I never said any system must meet my approval, only that if the government restricts the ability to defend, it must provide the defense.

I think you're used to getting away with bombast.

I don't have the same definition of "troll" as Vox (heavens, disagreement from the commentariat, it cannot be). Someone who throws around insults, deliberately mis-represents the words of others to create strawmen, and can't "sack up" when an apology is in order is a troll in my book, just looking for attention.

Anonymous VD December 31, 2014 11:53 AM  

You came into the thread, threw bombs, and never made an effort to articulate an argument or address others who drove a truck through your position.

Owen, you need to learn to back down once your initial assumption is shown to be incorrect. Jack Hanson is obviously no troll. The fact that he may have caused you to initially and incorrectly believe he was is irrelevant.

It's like I tell kids when they start saying "well, I thought" after I point out to them that they understood something incorrectly. Did I ask you what you thought? No.

No one cares why you thought Jack was a troll, or whether you were justified in doing so. Do move on to the substantive part of the discussion rather than defending your past misconception. It's a) no big deal and b) no one cares.

In general, if you find yourself arguing about arguing, just stop. It never goes anywhere.

Anonymous VD December 31, 2014 11:55 AM  

I think you're used to getting away with bombast.

Owen, again, no one cares. Focus on the ideas and the arguments, not the individual. The most effective way to attack an individual is through demonstrating the flaws in his ideas and his arguments anyhow.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:56 AM  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 11:58 AM  

Whoops. That was unintentional. Please delete my last.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza December 31, 2014 11:58 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous harry12 December 31, 2014 12:00 PM  

Perhaps a quote from A. Einstein at this point?

“Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.”

Blogger LP 999/Eliza December 31, 2014 12:01 PM  

Today, st. pattys day, cinco de myao and other drinking holidays are questionable - who is going to help the roofie girls? Pussy Riot ain't got nothing (69 eyes reference) on roofie booze time for a big city new year. I bet the NYC'ers who didn't want to work for, you know, the badge and uniform, they give out to just anyone (my chemical romance reference, NJ), to help the party kids home. The bars and judges are next up to decide if they want police protection or if they want to take responsibility for their own asses, get guns and defend themselves?!

OT: I did take a day off from the gym last week and tomorrow. I slightly freaked out, just a tinge of panic but zero changes to the negative.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza December 31, 2014 12:03 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 12:04 PM  

Unfunny sarcasm is totally the way to show that you're not 100% bothered by this statement.

Everyone should be able to take a little good-natured ribbing.

Anonymous Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 12:05 PM  

If that's what it was I "retract and apologize".

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 12:08 PM  

The People are telling the police that stopping, frisking, and writing tickets to poor people (blacks, browns and yellows) are racial oppression.

I question your assertion that the police are somehow doing this in response to the will of the people and not because of their own self-interests.

Anonymous Sam the man December 31, 2014 12:11 PM  

Jack Hanson,

Thank you for your reply. I cannot see how anyone here would have any issue with your replies. I hope you will stay and offer another perspective on this site; it would keep the site from becoming an echo chamber. I think folks hearing the police side of things helps to keep a balance.

I would mention something that you might not see, coming from your perspective. I work in a technical field in PA, in an outer suburb of Philadelphia. One of the amazing things to me is that most of my coworkers, who are middle-aged, married, degreed folks (about half with BS degrees in computer science and half in engineering with a healthy mix of MS degrees), without criminal backgrounds and living in nice neighborhoods view police. Almost to a man they are deeply suspicious of police and see them as a bigger threat to their families’ well-being than the criminal class. Quite amazing when one thinks that these folks are pretty much the class one would expect to be most supportive of police, given very few of them are into any form of martial arts. Yet if you talk to them on why they have these opinions, they have very astute observations that cannot be just dismissed.

When upper class folks, in a good area where weapons are not restricted are suspicious of police… well that does not bode well for anybody.

Anonymous Bobo December 31, 2014 12:23 PM  

But was he wrong?

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 December 31, 2014 12:29 PM  

Well, they probably all hit their ticket quotas for this month anyhow.

Tomorrow it will all start again anew.

Blogger Bob Wallace December 31, 2014 12:33 PM  

Two non-white cops murdered by a non-white is an imported race war. Where's the heroes in that?

Blogger LP 999/Eliza December 31, 2014 12:34 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza December 31, 2014 12:36 PM  

An imported race war was what they wanted, more drama and money for travel to NYC, just for a morbid view of whatever. NYC is a foreign country as far as I care.

Anonymous Stg58 / Animal Mother December 31, 2014 12:38 PM  

Jack,

Stick around. Your perspective is incredibly important, and if you have any other peace officer colleagues that are interested in joining in here, please encourage them to.

Owen,

Yes Jack's initial comments were annoying, but like Edward Isaacs on the SJW's in England thread, once he realized the lay of the land he corrected his trajectory.

Anonymous DavidK December 31, 2014 12:43 PM  

If I were the mayor of New York I would take advantage of this situation by firing as many cops as I could. Of course with civil service laws that might be operationally difficult or impossible. New Yorkers may need to buy guns now but at least they know their chances of being arrested for it are low.

Anonymous patrick kelly December 31, 2014 1:03 PM  

This is what I want the police to do...stop enforcing the drug war and other revenue collection ordinances....I don't care what the motivation is........and it looks like NY has not plunged into anarchy either.....this is what more libertarian policing looks like....

Anonymous Dumb founded December 31, 2014 1:12 PM  

"What if they wait too long before seeing where things are going? What if they actually believe the diversity nonsense?"

I don't think the masters of the universe believe the diversity nonsense. However, they think it is important to them and maybe deBlasio has discovered how to turn it to his benefit.

Blogger Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 1:16 PM  

Stg58,

I'm a long time lurker and have a book reviewed on the Castilia House blog, so I am not going anywhere soon, but thank you all the same. I just got tired of the oneupsmanship in "I hate the police/Oh yeah I hate them even more" call and response kabuki.

I don't think law enforcement in nearly as monolithic as some assume. Murrieta was nearly a DHS civil war which would have been amusing at the least. I've got my issues with the job but there's a lot of assumption with everyone in the US being a high IQ type able function with few boundaries. Say it ain't so.

The 'militarization' of the police comes from a few different things, including the human urge of a lot of police officers to be "high speed". The other factors include slick typess good at marketing themselves ( COL Dave Grossman, while making some valid points, falls here), a proliferation of free shit, and Iraq/Afghan war vets unable to realize they're not walking a patrol anymore (speaking from experience).

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 1:16 PM  

this is what more libertarian policing looks like...

I'm not sure I'd call it, "libertarian policing."

It could be reflective of what a libertarian government could produce. That is, fewer laws to enforce.

The NYPD has taken the (normal and somewhat daily) liberty of picking and choosing the laws they enforce to another level. I realize police do this already, but not at this scale.

I'd like to see fewer laws on the books, especially laws for "nuisances."

Putting police in a position of arbitrary enforcement shifts a great deal of liability from the legislators to the police. Legislators should only pass laws they demand to be enforced, up to the threat of force. If they're not comfortable with that idea, they shouldn't pass it and shirk the responsibility onto the police.

Our legislators pass more and/or tougher laws, then proclaim the need for more and tougher police/enforcement to meet the new demands. This is a cycle that, in part, entices police to accept the military hardware and adopt more military verbiage and tactics.

Blogger Res Ipsa December 31, 2014 1:19 PM  

traffic tickets and summonses for minor offenses have dropped off by a staggering 94 percent following the execution of two cops

Looks like a win-win to me. Two fewer tax parasites and more reasonable law enforcement.

When the police abandon the moral authority to do their jobs, there isn't any reason for them to do them at all. It's just as well. The sooner we let it burn the sooner we can rebuild. Too bad the rebuilding will take place in our children's or grandchildren's lifetime. I hope they don't judge us too harshly.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 1:20 PM  

shirk=shift

Anonymous Stg58 / Animal Mother December 31, 2014 1:25 PM  

Jack,

Didn't know you were a lurker, your initial comments didn't jive with that. At first you sounded like the typical FredBacker type, but minus his inability to learn and adapt.

I'm on the Board of Directors of Oath Keepers, so the many facets of police officer thinking s something we encounter on a daily basis.

Anonymous Harsh December 31, 2014 1:31 PM  

I'm a long time lurker and have a book reviewed on the Castilia House blog, so I am not going anywhere soon, but thank you all the same. I just got tired of the oneupsmanship in "I hate the police/Oh yeah I hate them even more" call and response kabuki.

Fair enough. Mistakes were made and all that. We do get a lot of trolls who come in here with the same sort of talking points you used just to lob hand grenades and be general pains in the ass, so you can see where the misunderstanding stems.

Anonymous patrick kelly December 31, 2014 1:41 PM  

"Putting police in a position of arbitrary enforcement shifts a great deal of liability from the legislators to the police. "

This is always the case when we accept "you might beat the rap but you can't beat the ride" mentality that practically gives police carte-blanch in which and how they enforce laws. They already do this based on arbitrary, subjective criteria, maybe even dependent on how many donuts they ate earlier, so I'm having a hard time coming up with much concern about them using this power to back off and police less.

It sure looks like both the means and end line up with what I consider desirable. I'm more than willing to consider why I should care more about the motivation, but I don't see much change there either, it's still self interest, and I doubt that will ever change. What can change is what the PTP are willing to sanction and pay the police to do. That will change their perception of what is in their self interest.

Blogger Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 2:09 PM  

That's understandable, but I didn't think I would be changing minds as much as "This shit again?" was my gut response. I had just got done prodding Ben Domenech at his sudden embrace of statism so there was some bleed through. Whoops.

Good organization that, specifically because its full of grown ups and not yahoos. Keep on meaning to get my paperwork in order and join.

Blogger Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 2:10 PM  

No harm no foul. All is forgotten and forgiven.

Blogger 8to12 December 31, 2014 2:11 PM  

Churchians and feminist apply the same arguments to men who are "going their own way" (refusing to shoulder the traditional responsibilities, because the game has been rigged against them and they are treated as either the enemy or a non-person).

And how are police officers suddenly being treated? As the enemy and a non-person.

Why should policemen continue to shoulder the traditional burdens and duties of being a police officer if their reward is to be de-humanized to the point that a large part of society (including much of the MSM) thinks randomly killing them is somehow justified?

Is the work slowdown morally right? Probably not. Is it a predictable response? Yes.

Kick a dog long enough and it either runs away or bites you. Expect a shortage of police officers over the next few years (as many will quit or never join the force to begin with). Those that are left will perform at a lower level than in the past.

Blogger Kentucky Packrat December 31, 2014 2:14 PM  

One of the amazing things to me is that most of my coworkers, who are middle-aged, married, degreed folks (about half with BS degrees in computer science and half in engineering with a healthy mix of MS degrees), without criminal backgrounds and living in nice neighborhoods view police. Almost to a man they are deeply suspicious of police and see them as a bigger threat to their families’ well-being than the criminal class.

I've tried to explain this before (including on Mas Ayoob's blog) unsuccessfully. It's the lawless spiral that Mexico is now at the end of; good people start seeing the police as just another gang that causes them problems. The good people then don't have to actively fight the police; they just have to quit backing them.

I saw serious signs of it in Kentucky in 2013. In Bardstown, a city cop was assassinated on an exit of the Bluegrass Parkway. 18 months later, and there's no sign of any suspects or resolution. Before, that kind of killing wouldn't have been tolerated long-term; even other criminals would have turned someone in for that kind of attack on the police. Now, nothing.

The view of cops as just another gang to be annoying is going to keep building unless the police actively fight it, and I don't see any concentrated effort to do so.

Anonymous Jack Amok December 31, 2014 2:16 PM  

I don't so much fault the police for the tactics they are employing as for the strategy they are avoiding.

What the police are doing: engaging in a power play with the Mayor.

What the police should be doing: working to return to a Peelian ideal of police as ordinary citizens who just happen to have a full time job enforcing just laws. No more militarization, no more "cops and little people" attitude, no more blue wall, no special rights (e.g. to carry weapons the average citizen is denied). And no more "just doin' my job" attitude towards enforcing overbearing laws. The Police unions out here in WA state energetically opposed the latest gun-grabbing measure (unfortunately it still passed). More of that please.

The tactic they're employing doesn't make them any worse than they already are, but it makes it clear they aren't working at getting better. At least as an organization. Individual cops may be excellent people, but the institution is broken in many, many places.

Anonymous Nate Winchester December 31, 2014 2:18 PM  

Every employee complains sometimes about the more annoying aspects of his job. Find me a cop who spoke out publicly (not office bitching) against the proliferation of victimless, revenue-generating crimes. Find me a cop who took a stand against the increasing militarization and use of force in arrests where there is no resistance. And since we're constantly told that the problem isn't with the rank and file cops, but with "corruption," find me a whistleblower. Preferably one who's still alive and wasn't driven out of his job.

Per http://www.bls.gov/ooh/protective-service/police-and-detectives.htm there's 780k police in this nation. Three quarters of a million people (not even counting former or retired) and you think NONE of them have ever spoken publicly or complained?

Uh... you've never looked have you?
http://www.whas11.com/videos/news/local/indiana/2014/12/31/attorney-for-police-whistleblower-speaks/21090817/

Wait... if the problem is with higher ups, not rank & file, how would I ever find a whistleblower NOT driven out of the job? I mean, by definition if the management was corrupt, then why WOULDN'T they fire a whistleblower? That demand is like the ones I hear from atheists that boil down to: "Find me evidence of the divine which would convert anybody on hearing, delivered and reported by someone who is not a believer.

Now just for fun, according to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_police_officers (and yeah, I know, wikipedia), if you look at police per 100k people based on 2012...

USA has 248 per 100k.

That's... kind of low (I mean if America wants to be a police state... they're going to need to get a lot more). Vox's current home of Italy has 465per. Germany 296. France? 356.

Know who's the biggest? Vatican City - 15,625. Let the Catholic/police state jokes begin! ;-) lol

Blogger Res Ipsa December 31, 2014 2:23 PM  

Why should policemen continue to shoulder the traditional burdens and duties of being a police officer...

Then stop accepting the paycheck.

There is a young man of my acquaintance who spent 4 years at college to be a cop. He graduated at the top of his class in college and the police academy. He's a good kid and a smart one. He was hired on at one of the larger police departments in our state. As soon as he finished his probationary training period, he quit.

Like I said, he's smart and a good kid. It just about killed his folks to have him walk away from 4 years of mom and dad paid college. He still doesn't get much support for his decision. He did the right thing for the right reasons. He wasn't willing to be the kind of cop that the department wanted him to be. So he walked away.

Anonymous Sheila December 31, 2014 2:25 PM  

Owen: This ("I'd like to see fewer laws on the books, especially laws for "nuisances.") is something I doubt any here would disagree with. However, as you most probably realize, most of these things now supposed to be enforced by "the law" used to be enforced by a uniform, non-diverse, and generally law-abiding citizenry with a generally accepted code of public conduct. Diversity, the gift that keeps on giving.

It's interesting to read Jack's perspective. I was raised to be respectful and trusting of the police, and other than the occasional traffic ticket have had no dealings with them. However, I have been less than impressed by the increasingly non-White police I've had to deal with, and the local cops (at least publicly) seem to push multiculturalism in a big way.

My husband's office has, for the past few years, employed a number of retired cops for extra security . The main guy has offered a few concealed carry classes for employees (and I think he went out shooting with my husband once). While I'm inclined to think that the majority of cops will fire upon the people when/if told to, my hubby disagrees. I don't think I'm anxious to find out who's correct.

Anonymous Jack Amok December 31, 2014 2:32 PM  

@Jack Hanson,

One of the side-effects of being trolled so much is a familiarity with common SWJ tactics. In particular, I'll point out that "don't DISQUALIFY me bro" and calling commenters "rabbits" is a very common first fall-back for trolls when their opening attacks don't work. Then after that, you even tried separating Vox from the ilk with "... I can disagree with you here, but still find that you make valid points in other areas. I'd say some of the commentariat here hasn't learned that lesson....If I'm not fair to your commentariat its because many of them stand on your shoulders... " Nice of you to give Vox an opportunity to disavow those badthinkers and return to the good graces of polite company. There was a SJW stench about your arguments. Perhaps you're not aware of it, so I'll point it out under the assumption you'd want to know so you can fix it.

Now, that said, I'll drop it.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 2:33 PM  

I'm moving to Pitcairn Islands (1 cop).

Anonymous Giuseppe December 31, 2014 2:41 PM  

Hear Hear Vox.
Also, it is patently obvious that the petty dictators are both a cowardly bunch of bullies and, well... that. Twice. Once for not doing their job and secondly for making it patently obvious that most of their job is harassing people for the most trivial bullshit in order to feel superior.
To be fair, it does fit their requirements for employment. You know, make sure they are stupid and aggressive as an actual policy for hiring them.

Anonymous Jack Amok December 31, 2014 2:42 PM  

I understand that there is corruption in the police force and this is a problem. However, there is another problem, which is that the police are constantly criticized as evil and racist literally no matter what they do.

Agreed, and this highlights one of the major problems we have. What sort of people are likely to remain in a job where they are criticized no matter what they do? Certainly not people who's main motivation is "to protect and serve," not if he's going to be lambasted by the apparent spokesmen of the people he thinks he's serving. Perhaps it wasn't the fault of Officer Friendly from 40 years ago that this change occured, but the result is that people who take and remain in the job are increasingly thugs and bullies. A gang member is hated and criticized by polite society, but he takes the job anyway because he doesn't care what polite society thinks so long as he can throw his weight around. So we increasingly have the Badge Gang.

But refraining from criticism also makes the problem worse as it just empowerd the thugs more. The solution really boils down to the same solution we need for every other broken aspect of our society: accountability. Police who engage in unjust behavior need to be held accountable (including by their fellow officers), and politicians (elected or otherwise) who engage in unjust criticism need to be held accountable as well. What's unjust? That's a judgement call, and it requires decent people willing and able to make it competently. We have to put those sort of people back in charge of society. Everything else is just a sideshow.

Blogger Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 2:43 PM  

None of that changes the legitimacy of anything I said.

Maybe you should stop sniffing for witches and come up with better arguments. The only whiff I'm getting is some of you burning rubber trying to backpedal.

Anonymous Dumb founded December 31, 2014 2:44 PM  

An alternate ending for NYC:

https://storify.com/Popehat/galt-city-blues

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 2:51 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 2:53 PM  

I think the strongest motivation for many to stay 20+ years is the pension and job security. They know who they hire and what the typical 20+ year cop is like. I don't think it's bullying that keeps them in the uniform. The larger forces pick candidates with fewer options or skills because they're more likely to stay in line and keep their heads down.

That said, the unions have blunted accountability and, in doing so, often back the bully. Back the bully so you can later back the guy getting shafted by public opinion.

I can't help but think of Nimitz when folks talk about holding folks accountable. He would've been ridden out of uniform with the standards today.

Anonymous The Lion December 31, 2014 2:56 PM  

Maybe you should stop sniffing for witches and come up with better arguments. The only whiff I'm getting is some of you burning rubber trying to backpedal.

In spite of the mini-detente that's taken place, you seem intent on being a first-class asshole.

One reason people don't care anymore if cops get shot up is because they've interacted with cops like you.

Blogger Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 2:59 PM  

While I'm also cross trained as an EMT, giving you vagisil for your hurt feelings is beyond my scope of practice.

Anonymous Jack Amok December 31, 2014 3:03 PM  

Hason, you're slipping back into troll mode. Are you making arguments or insulting people?

Blogger Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 3:05 PM  

I'll also add that attempting to dog someone out and then saying BUT ILL DROP IT so one can play the aggrieved victim when someone responds is a womanly form of argument.

Not saying Amok has done this as of this writing, but doing it for him isn't doing you any favors.

Anonymous Shibes Meadow December 31, 2014 3:07 PM  

1. Mr. Jack Hanson non-ironically used the word "totes" in a post. This instantly removes him from the universe of posters to this blog whose opinions matter,

2. If all the police in America vanished in a puff of smoke one day, chaos would not descend and life would go on.

3. Police are civilians and should be dressed and armed as is typical of the citizens in their area. An armband and a tin badge would suffice. Patrol officers should be unarmed watchmen who walk the streets of their patrol area as a friendly, dependable presence who knows who belongs in the neighborhood and who does not.

4. Police patrols as we know them should be eliminated and replaced by a network of neighborhood police boxes from which armed (concealed-carry holding) citizen patrols operate. Each police box has a two-person team of badged peace officers (who are of the ethnicity most common in that neighborhood) who keep records, supervise the citizen patrols, and provide communication with headquarters. The box also has an arms locker (for emergency use only) and a small, one-man lockup.

5. Headquarters should be reduced to a communications team, an admin section, and a flying squadron of tactical response officers sufficient to control riots and other emergencies too big for the local box-and-patrol to handle.

Think it can't work? You're wrong. It does work... in Japan. Of course, Japan is full of Japanese people, with all the advantages that a monoracial, monocultural population has. Still, most neighborhoods in America are populated by boring White people who, in general, are as easy to police as Japanese people are. Neighborhoods like that might as well be in Japan. Japan-type policing would work well in such neighborhoods.

The only places in America that need armed, uniformed police are neighborhoods where the primary population is non-White, neighborhoods where there are large numbers of (for lack of a better term) White Trash, and high-density urban zones. Tarrant County, Texas, could very easily get by with just the County Sheriff and his deputies, as we are all armed to the teeth and only call the cops after the crime has occurred.

Blogger Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 3:07 PM  

Uh I'm supposed to make an argument to 'fuck u dead cops'? Seriously?

A troll is not someone who 'disagrees with you', for the umpteeth time.

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 3:09 PM  

An alternate ending for NYC:

https://storify.com/Popehat/galt-city-blues


Tweet 14 is missing.

Illuminati proved.

The last tweet was a nice touch (wink to MP)

Anonymous Giuseppe December 31, 2014 3:11 PM  

I think it is fair to say that Jack Hanson is not a troll; he just has a different cant on these events and has the courage to put forward a opinion that is not popular on this site. That said while he has brought up a reasonable point, what do you expect the police to do?

What I EXPECT them to do, is precisely what they are doing, because they are a bunch of cowardly thugs. What I would personally like them to do, or what they would do if they were suddenly magically enlightened with wisdom, justice and honour, (and hence the need to divest themselves of the corrupt, the cowardly and the thuggish was obviated because, MAGIC!) is that they would:

A) Train like fanatics to ensure they are well beyond "better than average" at de-escalating situations, taking in violent offenders with the least amount of force possible, train in the philosophical and practical application of justice, ethics and honour and treat citizens with the compassion, mercy, and patience that a trained and stipended warrior should show in SERVICE to the citizenry he protects, at the cost of his own life if necessary. And,

B) do their job.

Anonymous Jack Amok December 31, 2014 3:12 PM  

I think the strongest motivation for many to stay 20+ years is the pension and job security.

Sure, I know quite a few ex-cops and soon-to-be-ex ones who stuck it out to pay the bills. I have a frequent shooting partner who is a year away from his pension and counting the days like a kid counts down to Santa Claus.

They know who they hire and what the typical 20+ year cop is like. I don't think it's bullying that keeps them in the uniform.

Not the only thing, but it's a weighting factor. I know several guys who left before their pension. EMTs (since Hanson mentioned it) and firefighting are two very common transfers - and those tend to be the "protect and serve" guys. They're still doing something they see as a noble job helping their community.

Not every guy who stays is a thug (and not every guy who leaves is a saint either for that mater), but there's still a thumb on the scale pointing that direction. More are thugs today than before, and so long as the conditions under which they are asked to do their jobs stay as they are now, that trend will continue. Change the rewards for a job and you will change the sort of person who does it. Not overnight, but over time.

Anonymous DT December 31, 2014 3:14 PM  

NYPD traffic tickets and summonses for minor offenses have dropped off by a staggering 94 percent...Citations for traffic violations fell by 94 percent...Summonses for low-level offenses like public drinking and urination also plunged 94 percent...Even parking violations are way down...Drug arrests dropped by 84 percent, from 382 to 63.

So NYPD cops are ignoring victimless crimes and petty bureaucratic BS. What's the down side again?

(Joking...I do get Vox's very well made point about the children in the NYPD.)

Blogger Owen December 31, 2014 3:16 PM  

I would be interested in seeing if there's a corresponding change in violent crime arrests and/or change in response time to 911 calls related to violent crimes.

Blogger Jack Hanson December 31, 2014 3:17 PM  

So be Jedi Knights/ninja masters? Okay. That sounds pretty cool actually.

The police will do all that when the citizenry takes republican virtues to heart and engages in government thoughtfully and rationally instead of responding like panicked animals to every new stimulus demanding someone do something.

As someone said above, this is the "ban guns/less crime" argument with different colors.

Anonymous Anubis December 31, 2014 3:17 PM  

I see this as good because they are more likely to be receptive to Bracken's Dear Mr Security Agent letter. http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2013/01/07/bracken-dear-mr-security-agent/
I cant fault the cops for doing this when mayor De Blasé is willing to stab their backs. They are simply avoiding situations where they might be in a position to shoot a criminal. I fall on the side of those that think cops not doing their jobs could make even New Yorkers become pro-gun(for non criminals)which would be a win for our side.
There is the paradox that gays can get married in NYC but Nanny Bloomers jack booted storm troopers would stomp the heads of 2 consenting adults sharing a 20oz soda. http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/liberal-logic-does-it-make-any-sense-to-you/question-3623229/?page=2

Blogger Nate December 31, 2014 3:19 PM  

"They're going to go back to doing it after they generate enough fear in the public or get what they want (whatever it is) from the mayor's office.

This isn't a philosophical shift the NYPD is making. And it will be short lived.

Why applaud what is clearly just a negotiation tactic?"


Because why they are doing it is irrelevant. This is the behavior we want from them. We should be standing up and applauding it. We should be giving them bonuses and raises for it.

Anonymous Giuseppe December 31, 2014 3:20 PM  

Vox, these are good questions, maybe you could do an Ilk poll?

Ditto
I'll answer for myself, Sam the Man.

1) Do you accept that police work is not one of the most dangerous occupations, yes or no?

Yes.

2) Do you think that the increasing trend of militarization of police is reasonable, yes or no?

No.

3) Do you see police as civilians, yes or no?

Yes.

4) Do you agree that police should have access to small arms that the regular citizens should be denied, yes or no?

No. But with a corollary. The police SHOULD have constant, ongoing and excellent training in the use of force, their weapons, de-escalation techniques and ethics, justice and honour. The scientifically and real versions of these words, not the new-speak psycho-babble of the 1984 world we live in. So, that said, and the police being civilians, civilians who want to own the same type of weapons should demonstrate an objectively similar capacity for correct use and handling of their weapons as well as a commensurate understanding of justice, ethics, etc.

5) Can you see, given the trends in law enforcement/police in the last 20 years, why productive citizens would be suspicious of police having more power, yes of no?

Yes. I think a blind, deaf and dumb man would "see it" too.

OpenID cailcorishev December 31, 2014 3:21 PM  

One of the amazing things to me is that most of my coworkers, who are middle-aged, married, degreed folks (about half with BS degrees in computer science and half in engineering with a healthy mix of MS degrees), without criminal backgrounds and living in nice neighborhoods view police. Almost to a man they are deeply suspicious of police and see them as a bigger threat to their families’ well-being than the criminal class.

Let me see if I can explain. I live in a mostly white, rural area. I've never had a problem with a criminal in my life (I'm not talking about the socio-economic effects of crime and so on; I'm talking about personal violence or damage). That's why those people live where they do: so they don't have criminals around.

On the other hand, I have been harassed by cops, and probably will be again in the future. If I shoot an animal out of season, or build something without the proper paperwork, or do any of a thousand other things that have been deemed illegal, it will be a cop who shows up at my door armed, not a criminal. Granted, those rules come from judges and politicians, not from the cops themselves, but the judges and politicians won't be at my door with a gun. Cops will be.

So that's why. Your nice neighbor is more likely to have his day ruined by a cop because he forgot to put his seatbelt on than by a mugger wanting his wallet.

Blogger Nate December 31, 2014 3:21 PM  

"The police will do all that when the citizenry takes republican virtues to heart and engages in government thoughtfully and rationally instead of responding like panicked animals to every new stimulus demanding someone do something."

No.

All the police have to do, when the sheep bleat and cry over nothing, is to do what the wise shepherd does... ignore them.

Anonymous Jack Amok December 31, 2014 3:22 PM  

I'll also add that attempting to dog someone out and then saying BUT ILL DROP IT so one can play the aggrieved victim when someone responds is a womanly form of argument.

Oh fuck you idiot. I did that because Vox doesn't want a debate on debate tactics. I thought you might like to know why you were treated like a garden-variety troll so that you could be treated differently. You're choice how you want to act, my choice what I think of you for it.

Your lurking has been pretty damned unobservant if you think I'm likely to play the aggrieved victim.

No, a troll is not someone who disagrees with you, but you're not just disagreeing with people. You're disagreeing in specific ways we've seen trolls use in the past. Trolls with no particular desire to listen to arguments or engage in any honest debate.

So, what arguments have I made regarding police in this post?

1 – 200 of 387 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts