Troubling That This Even Needs Considering

What happens if Democrats decide rioting is fine when done by non-Deplorables and citizens have to deal with riots:

When word is received that a flash mob is forming at one of their pre-reconnoitered intersections or highway interchanges, the SAV team will assemble. Sometimes cooperating police will pass tactical intel to their civilian friends on the outside. Some clever individuals will have exploited their technical know-how and military experience to build real-time intel collection tools, such as private UAVs. Police will have access to urban security camera footage showing MUYs moving barricade materials into position—a normal prerequisite to a flash mob riot intended to stop traffic. Tip-offs to the vigilantes will be common, and where the networks are still functioning, citizens may still be able to access some video feeds. Sometimes, police will even join the SAV teams, incognito and off-duty, blurring the teams into so-called “death squads.”

The operation I will describe (and it’s only one of dozens that will be tried) uses two ordinary pickup trucks and eight fighters. Two riflemen are lying prone in the back of each truck, facing rearward, with removable canvas covers concealing their presence. Their semi-automatic, scoped rifles are supported at their front ends on bipods for very accurate shooting. A row of protective sandbags a foot high is between them and the raised tailgate.

In the cab are a driver and a spotter in the passenger seat who also serves as the vehicle’s 360-degree security. The two trucks don’t ever appear on the same stretch of road, but coordinate their movements using one-word brevity codes over small FRS walkie-talkie radios. Each truck has a series of predetermined elevated locations where the intersection in question will lie between 200 and 500 yards away. Each truck is totally nondescript and forgettable, the only detail perhaps being the non-MUY ethnicity of the suburbanite driver and spotter driving relatively near to a riot in progress.

By the time the two SAV pickup trucks arrive at their firing positions on different streets and oriented ninety degrees to one another, the flash mob riot is in full swing. A hundred or more of the rampaging youths are posturing and throwing debris into traffic in order to intimidate some cars into stopping. The riflemen in the backs of the pickups are waiting for this moment and know what to expect, trusting their spotters and drivers to give them a good firing lane. The spotters in each truck issue a code word on their radios when they are in final position. The tailgates are swung down, and the leader among the riflemen initiates the firing. All-around security is provided by the driver and spotter.

Source: Troubling That This Even Needs Considering

A major function of the police is to protect criminals from mob justice. Remove that barrier, and we may not like what results.

Guns And Liberty, 2021: Part 2 — Stately McDaniel Manor

Last week’s installment of this updated series asked a fundamental question: Do human beings have an unalienable right to self-defense? There is no question the founding fathers of our constitutional, representative republic—we are not a democracy, thank God–believed they do–they must–and they acknowledged–not created–that unalienable, individual right in the Second Amendment. This was finally–in 2008 and 2010 […]

Guns And Liberty, 2021: Part 2 — Stately McDaniel Manor

Portland police leaving the poorly run city

Daily Wire:

Portland, Ore., police officers are fleeing the city’s force, and often taking a hit to pay and benefits to do so. The flight of law enforcement from the city is “unprecedented,” Assistant Chief Michael Frome told the Portland Tribune.  “We really have not seen this many people leaving at this stage in their career.”

….

The activists’ calls to cut police budgets were picked up by some of Portland’s elected officials. In June, the City Council approved a $15 million cut to the police department’s budget to funnel more money into spending on social programs.

The cut sent the bureau reeling as it laid off some officers and cut its recruiter position since the department did not have money to make new hires anyway. The department cut vacant positions that it had historically held open to keep a steady stream of recruits, which require 18 months of training to begin independent police work, coming into the force.

“When the cuts came in and we basically lost our vacancies, that put us in a bigger fiscal hole than we were anticipating being in,” Frome said. “We didn’t have the money to hire, so we laid off basically half of our background investigators. We laid off our recruiter, because we just did not see a position in the near future where we were going to be able to use them to capacity.”

 

Source: Portland police leaving the poorly run city

The left pushes back on the Stephanie Mohr pardon

(Paul Mirengoff) President Trump brightened my Christmas season when he pardoned former police officer Stephanie Mohr. Now, the Washington Post and its leftist sources have brightened it even more by complaining about the pardon.

Their unhappiness makes me happy. It also tends to confirm the wisdom of Trump’s decision.

….

According to the facts as stated by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in her case, Mohr released the dog after her training officer sought and obtained consent from the officer in charge of the scene. The training officer was acquitted. The officer in charge took a guilty plea in exchange for his testimony against Mohr and was sentenced to 15 months in prison. (Mohr’s testimony was that she released the dog because the suspect ignored repeated instructions to follow police orders. If so, she shouldn’t have been convicted of any crime.)

Thus, far from bearing sole responsibility for the dog bite, Mohr doesn’t even bear primary responsibility under the only version of the facts that renders her culpable. Clearly, then, her long sentence was a miscarriage of justice.

I’m glad President Trump did what he could to mitigate the injustice. If that makes the Post and its anti-police allies unhappy, all the better.

Source: The left pushes back on the Stephanie Mohr pardon

Police Defunding, Like Communism, Can’t Fail

“I guess you can use a snappy slogan, like ‘defund the police.’ But, you know, you lost a big audience the minute you say it,” Barack Obama complained. Obama was pretending that there had never been a serious push to get rid of the police, and after spending eight years mainstreaming black nationalism and the pro-crime politics of police defunding was trying to pretend it was just an edgy slogan calling for “criminal justice reform”.

Source: Police Defunding, Like Communism, Can’t Fail

Some ideas are so stupid only intellectuals believe them.

— George Orwell

Deadly Laws: Sleeping Peaceably

And this is also a response to people who say passing a counterfeit $20 bill shouldn’t be a death penalty offense.

Most importantly, we must never make any law we are not willing to kill to enforce, for that is the final civilizational choice in law enforcement.  If we are unwilling to back up our choice of laws with the force necessary to secure them, including deadly force when necessary, we find ourselves facing cries to defund, abolish and reimagine the police.

Stately McDaniel Manor

If we wish to have police forces—we all know about D/S/C ruled cities that don’t—they must have the authorization to use force, up to and including deadly force.  So yes, the police may end up killing someone over a traffic violation.  But if they do, and if they acted lawfully, they used deadly force because all of the elements necessary for the use of deadly force were present, not because someone ran a red light, which was merely the probable cause predicate for the police to stop them.  It was only when they drew a weapon and threatened the police with imminent seriously bodily injury or death that the police were authorized to use deadly force.  However, if there were no laws against running red lights, that person would never have been killed by the police.  Do we therefore eliminate all traffic laws because of the possibility someone stopped for violating one may provoke the police into shooting them?

The same applies when a criminal steals a $5.00 pink flamingo from someone’s yard.  The crime would generally be petty theft, a misdemeanor.  Conviction for that crime would never involve the death penalty, but only a small fine, occasionally restitution, and maybe a short jail sentence in a county jail if the criminal has a previous record of convictions.  However, if confronted by the homeowner in the commission of that crime, the criminal pulls a knife and menaces the homeowner, the elements for the use of deadly force may be present, and they may be shot and killed.  One may whine the criminal died for stealing a plastic flamingo, and no one should face the death penalty for misdemeanor theft, but that’s not really what happened, was it?  Do we make theft legal to avoid the possibility a thief may be lawfully injured or killed?

ibid

Stately McDaniel Manor

credit: babylon bee

On 12-03-20 I wrote Reimagining Reality, which was an article about what defunding and abolishing the police really means.  Because this reality is so little known and appreciated, this excerpt was of particular importance:

View original post 1,715 more words

BYRON YORK: “Defund the police” and the damage done….

“DEFUND THE POLICE” AND THE DAMAGE DONE: Remember the debate over the meaning of the phrase “defund the police”? Repeated over and over on the progressive left, it seemed pretty clear — it meant that cities should no longer fund, and thus effectively abolish, their police forces. But some Democrats worried that embracing such a radical proposal might hurt them politically, so they suggested that it actually meant re-directing some, but not all, funds from police to things like mental health treatment and affordable housing. Nothing too radical.

Every time Democrats thought they had limited the political damage done by a literal interpretation of “defund the police,” some progressive voice would mess it all up. For example, in June, the New York Times published an op-ed headlined, “Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police.”

Source: BYRON YORK: “Defund the police” and the damage done….

Breonna Taylor: All That Is Left

Stately McDaniel Manor

Sometimes, police officers can do everything right, and things still go to hell.

I’ve not written on the Breonna Taylor case because everything I was able to find—until September 24—did not ring true.  Police officers sometimes make mistakes with warrants–even lie to obtain them–and sometimes engage in less than justified shooting, but this particular case seemed too good to be true in a media/BLM/Antifa narrative sense.  When Benjamin Crump, a race hustling, racist lawyer got involved representing the Taylor family, and quickly negotiated a $12 million dollar payday, I was sure the social justice narrative was too good to be true.  Now we know it was, not that that means anything to the thugs destroying, looting and burning Louisville and other cities.

View original post 1,347 more words