Recently in Public Order Category
After two decades of the most remarkable crime drop in U.S. history, law enforcement has come to this: "I'm deliberately not getting involved in things I would have in the 1990s and 2000s," an emergency-services officer in New York City tells me. "I won't get out of my car for a reasonable-suspicion stop; I will if there's a violent felony committed in my presence."
A virulent antipolice campaign over the past year--initially fueled by a since-discredited narrative about a police shooting in Ferguson, Mo.--has made police officers reluctant to do their jobs. The Black Lives Matter movement proclaims that the police are a lethal threat to blacks and that the criminal-justice system is pervaded by racial bias. The media amplify that message on an almost daily basis. Officers now worry about becoming the latest racist cop of the week, losing their job or being indicted if a good-faith encounter with a suspect goes awry or is merely distorted by an incomplete cellphone video.
With police so discouraged, violent crime has surged in at least 35 American cities this year. The alarming murder increase prompted an emergency meeting of the Major Cities Chiefs Association last month. Homicides were up 76% in Milwaukee, 60% in St. Louis, and 56% in Baltimore through mid-August, compared with the same period in 2014; murder was up 47% in Minneapolis and 36% in Houston through mid-July.
Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier's take on the current crime spree is that murder victims and suspects have in common previous run-ins with the law. Twenty-one of the homicide arrestees, she reported, were under supervision pending trial or on probation or parole at the time of the crime. Twenty-six of the murder victims were under court supervision. Ten individuals involved in homicides this year had previous homicide charges but were back on the streets. Six homicide victims had prior murder charges, she said. And almost half, or 45 percent, of the homicide arrestees had prior gun-related arrests.
For the better part of two decades, Columbia University law professor Bernard Harcourt has been on a personal crusade against Broken Windows policing, criticizing both its theoretical underpinnings and its policy applications. A close look at Harcourt's work, however, reveals not only the weaknesses of his arguments but also his lack of attention to other research findings that conflict with his own. His portrayal of Broken Windows policing, it turns out, is fundamentally inaccurate and incomplete. In effect, Harcourt creates and then fights a paper tiger.The misrepresentation of Broken Windows policing as "zero tolerance" policing, encouraging arrests for minor offenses, is an important element of the campaign against it. When you can't win with the truth, you have to make stuff up.
By way of background, Broken Windows is a policing tactic that emphasizes the police management of minor offenses. The authors of the Broken Windows hypothesis--George L. Kelling and the late James Q. Wilson--always maintained that Broken Windows policing should encourage proper discretion on the part of officers. Kelling in particular has discussed the importance of discretion when it comes to maintaining order, as in a recent article in Politico, where he indicates that arrest should be the last option when managing minor offenses.
For New Yorkers who remember the bad old days, the recent reminders of an era when urban pathologies ruled the streets can be jarring. Back when times were tough, residents of my neighborhood on the Upper West Side passed by abandoned graffiti-covered lots, crunched red-capped crack vials under their feet, and worried about when Larry Hogue, the "Wild Man of 96th Street," would make his next appearance. Now some of this sense of foreboding seems to be coming back.
[T]he Cleveland police declined to tolerate lawlessness. Paula Bolyard of PJ Media reports:
Cleveland police were taking no chances in the wake of the acquittal of police officer Michael Brelo, going to great lengths to ensure that Saturday afternoon's peaceful protests didn't evolve into violent riots like Baltimore and Ferguson have experienced in recent months.
In addition to having the National Guard on standby, police followed protesters through the streets and arrested anyone who acted violently or refused to obey police orders to disperse. A total of 71 people were arrested. . . .
Regarding the article "Texas Housing Case Tests Civil-Rights Doctrine" (page one, Jan. 21), the mischief maker in this case is the same one that perpetuates misery in public housing: Congress. I spent 13 years working in the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The two issues perpetually facing HUD were how to get the beneficiaries of public housing to accept personal and community responsibility, and how to convince the apologists and facilitators to stop putting their dogma ahead of getting the needy housed. While I was at HUD, a South African low-income-housing management firm presented to the San Francisco office how it had eliminated crime and misery in its buildings: Management strictly enforced rules and used video in the hallways and fingerprint security locks on building front doors, and required participation by the beneficiaries in maintaining the appearance of the building and surroundings. The firm reported that crime was virtually nonexistent and that residents viewed rules and security systems not as an invasion of human dignity but as critical to residents' well-being. In America, Congress has consistently prevented HUD from doing what it takes to get maximum housing for funds allocated and to get the misery makers out of public housing.
Obama "assured" NPR that the issue of mistrust between police and minority communities isn't new. He claimed, though, that it hasn't been widely discussed until now, and that the current discussion is "probably healthy."
But the problem that has surfaced under Obama isn't "discussion" of police-community relations. The problem is race rioting and violence against the police.
The Ferguson rioting; the chants calling for "dead cops" now; the assassination and attempted assassination of police officers; the reluctance, or even the refusal, of the police to respond promptly to calls for help -- these are phenomena we haven't witnessed since the 1970s.
These phenomena aren't "discussions,"and they certainly aren't "healthy." They are evidence of a deterioration in race relations and signs of a breakdown in society.
Law enforcement fatalities in the United States rose 24 percent in 2014 to 126 and ambush-style attacks were the No. 1 cause of felonious officer deaths for the fifth straight year, according to preliminary data from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund.
The NLEOMF report said 126 federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial officers were killed in the line of duty this year, compared to 102 in 2013. The number of officers killed by firearms in 2014 -- 50 -- is up 56 percent from the 32 killed last year.
Fifteen officers nationwide were killed in ambush assaults in 2014, and the recent shooting deaths of New York City Police Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos have attracted national attention and contributed to tension between police and the city's elected leaders.
The total of 15 ambush assaults matched 2012 for the highest total since 1995.
The hate war against the police is not directly responsible for most, or perhaps any, of this. At the same time, those insisting that hate has no consequences are lying to themselves and to us.
Despite the title and subhead, Kelling's first point is that "Broken Windows" is about more than policing.
Here's the theory in a nutshell. If a window is broken in a neighborhood and no one fixes it, it's a sign to all that nobody cares. People prone to vandalism become more bold, while people who would like to keep the neighborhood up become more likely to take a "why bother?" attitude. Things spiral downward, ultimately increasing major problems, including crime.
Taking care of problems that some people regard as petty actually does matter a lot.
Dr. Kelling, BTW, is a long time friend and advisor of CJLF, as was his co-author, the late James Q. Wilson
According to the police report,
The definition of robbery in California, unchanged since 1872, is "the felonious taking of personal property in the possession of another, from his person or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear." (Penal Code § 211.)
Miller-Young said that she "just grabbed it [the sign] from this girl's hands." Asked if there had been a struggle, Miller-Young stated, "I'm stronger so I was able to take the poster."
Miller-Young said that the poster had been taken back to her office. Once in her office, a "safe space" described by Miller-Young, Miller-Young said that they were still upset by the images on the poster and had destroyed it. Miller-Young said that she was "mainly" responsible for the posters destruction because she was the only one with scissors.
Miller-Young confessed to taking the property, and the "I'm stronger" statement effectively confesses the "force" element. (See 2 Witkin & Epstein, California Criminal Law, Crimes Against Property § 99.) This is not only a felony, but a "violent" one. (Penal Code § 667.5(c)(9).)
"Miller-Young said that she did not feel that what she had done was criminal."
In my view, one of the greatest problems in our society today is the extent to which our young people are being taught by persons utterly devoid of common sense. Miller-Young should be convicted of robbery. Whatever direct consequences the court may impose, the collateral consequence should be that she is fired and never teaches in this state (or hopefully any other) again.
Hundreds of illegal immigrants with criminal records were released earlier this year as the Obama administration prepared for budget cuts, according to newly released data that challenged claims the program involved "low-risk" individuals ****Of the 2,226 detainees that were released in February, the department revealed, "622 have been identified as having some type of criminal conviction."
Down the page, the story relates:
Nelson Peacock, assistant secretary for legislative affairs, said ICE focused on [releasing] those that "posed no significant threat to public safety."
What makes me think that no "significant" threat means that those released are thought to be likely to break into someone's house other than Mr. Peacock's?
Woman Calls 911, Asks Police for Help GettingRefund from Her Drug Dealer
After handing over her last $50 to a drug dealer for cocaine and marijuana, a Florida woman suffering from buyer's remorse called 911 and asked cops for help in securing a refund.
Katrina Tisdale, 47, explained to St. Petersburg police that she would be penniless until her next Social Security disability check arrived. Hence the pressing need to recover her $50 from the unnamed narcotics salesman.
Despite Tisdale's explanation for her two calls to 911 Monday evening, officers arrested her for misusing the police emergency system...Tisdale was booked into the Pinellas County jail, where she is being held on $100 bond.
According to jail records, Tisdale has been arrested many times over the past several years, including six arrests for cocaine possession. Tisdale was convicted in mid-2011 of calling 911 to falsely report that she had been robbed by her drug dealer.