The knockout game is where black teens or young men try to deck unsuspecting random whites or Asians with a single punch. Have you not heard of it??
What about the knockout game?
Mr. Bratton and LAPD are extremely anti-self defense and concealed carry, unless one is a celebrity or has connections with the right people in City Hall.
His comment that government's number one job is public safety means citizens need to be dependent on him and his officers, which is a task they are not up to, no matter how diligent and clever. They cannot be everywhere at once. His refusal to recognize this and deal constructively with the issue, while handing out CCW's to connected elites, makes him a hypocrite and narrow-minded.
A refreshing fantasy. Until that magic fairyland appears, talking to the police is a recipe for getting screwed -- civilians have no recourse when they're out of line.
So, does Brattan think he is a 100% correct-all-the-time prophet that sees perfectly into the future?
"I donít carry a gun now. I havenít for a while. Itís locked away. I just donít feel the need for it. And I like it that I can do that."
He reminds me of British police, social retardation to the max.
He does not know IF he needs a gun, as surely as states like California and New York judge to the negative whether citizens "need" to carry concealed. The right, properly re-introduced, is "shall-issue" and at maturity... no permit needed, as per the most enlightened and safe states of America.
As ever, NY and LA lead the country in backwards sophistry stupidness.
America was born with citizens having the right to carry arms, concealed or not, and New York began the horrid process of taking that right away. And now it has such an imbecile for a police leader, he even prophesies his own gunless, happy-to-be-victim state of blissful euro-chinese NY-LA progtardism.
"In a democratic society, the Number One obligation of the government is public safety."
Scary stuff. This is the reason we have the TSA groping us at airports, and Home Land Security targeting Conservatives and Libertarians as terroist, and Government monitoring our phone calls.
One thing that I've always believed, and that this interview indirectly brings to the surface, is that poverty usually does not create crime; rather, it is precisely areas of high crime that produce poverty, low ambitions, lack of self-respect, etc. Take Detroit...
For those who appreciate the Death Wish subway scenes, deBlasio's your man-- the anti "broken window" mayor.
I recently spent a weekend w Dallas PD on a ride along; literally every violent crime all night coming over the radio was committed by a black male. 100%.
For sophisticated NYers (Dems) who like to brag about their monopoly on all things science, they sure don't like when statistics (read: math) get in the way of their feel good politics.
New Jack City '14.
The problem with high-ranking officers in uniform is that they have been sissified into mealy-mouthed diplomats. Not racially profiling? Not targeting Muslims? Not doing your job.
The traditional view was that vicious criminals required vicious policemen. You don't fight leopards with rabbits. Remember LA
Confidential which rang a lot of bells with the oldtimers? People have
just not accepted that while those days were basically satisfying in a way that present policing is not, it is unthinkable to hope for their
return. We just have to accept that and suck it up. Norman Rockwell is
Not one word about how dumb it is to deny shall issue concealed carry in NYC. And how dumb it is for a police leader to go unarmed. Very un-American. Very Euro, very Chinese... to brag about being defenseless, which is to be senseless. Pride goes before the fall. In the Moscow Theater Siege, in the Nairobi shopping mall, yes... even on the planes during 9/11/2001... citizens needed their shall issue concealed carry guns to show the West... how crime is stopped. Duh. Western Enlightenment means we have the means to defend ourselves. Dumb means unarmed.
Not a word, one notices, about major problems such as the militarization of police forces, the increasing use of SWAT teams, the 'no-knock' disasters. The innovator turned CEO seems to have developed some serious blind spots.
"You cannot police differently in Harlem than youíre policing downtown."
The tension between public safety and race has never been more explicitly stated. Crime in downtown Manhattan is a fraction of crime in Harlem, where shootings occur daily. Does it not make sense for police to be more alert -- and proactive -- in Harlem or Red Hook than in, say, Madison Square?
The "egalitarian" impulse of the left wing posits that criminals aren't really that different from law-abiding citizens, and all -- perps and "civilians" alike -- must be given the benefit of every doubt before enforcement action is taken. DeBlasio's election is the culmination of this zeitgeist.
What will happen next is utterly, completely predictable, as street crime -- muggings, shootings, rape, flash mobs -- rages and spreads from Harlem to other parts of the city. When it reaches Central Park West and the Upper East Side, the high-minded voters who installed this brave new government may have occasion to rethink the equation: Where's Ray Kelly when you need him?
Very informative. How about Oakland??
I keep seeing that the first responsibility for government is to keep the people safe. WHERE does this come from? Safety of individuals is an individual issue.. WE are, each of us, responsible for our own safety. In many of the areas mentioned in this article, the principal tool the individual needs, and most often wants, the personal defensive firearm, is denied him, or is extremely difficult to possess legally. For far too long, this myth, that the police/government are responsible for individual safety, has bred a generation of abdicators who are content to leave their safety to government.... when, most often, it is government who are standing in the way of individual safety be denying the right to the proper tools.
When the criminal element in any given area learn that their putative victims are likely armed and skilled, their eagerness to perpetrate harm diminishes significantly. In contrast, in areas where laws, and law enforcement, accomodate the individual's right and desire to BE armed, crime is VERY low. In some places a citizen found to be in possession of a firearm, even lawfuly, is more exposed to harm from LE than from criminals. WHY does this situation persist? If the focus of government and law enforcement were to return to that of preserving the rights and liberties of the individuals, crime would largel be dealt with BY those same individuals, and the police would, indeed, be left with the assessment of crime scenes to determine what happened and who is liable to charges. Far too much LE resources are used to generate revenue for their jurisdictions by seeking out and apprehending non-victim activity, mainly traffic infractions, non-violent drug "offenses", and petty nonsense "charges" of no significance. I am generally law abiding, but every time I see any LEO, I do my best to disappear or not be noticed, and scrupulously avoid "contact". Far too many incidents occur where LEO are the perpetrator, innocent or innocuous peons their victims. It seems I'm as likely to get shot by LE than I am by criminals. Not a good situation.
Thank you for your article.Please train and support this new generation of law enforcement for they hold the keys to everyones constitutional rights and our childrens futures.
How very refreshing. Bratton for president. Seriously. We could do worse. We have. Again and again and again. And seldom better.