Mr. Comey’s remarks caught officials by surprise at the Justice Department, where his views are not shared at the top levels. Holding the police accountable for civil rights violations has been a top priority at the department in recent years, and some senior officials do not believe that scrutiny of police officers has led to an increase in crime. While the department had no immediate comment on Friday, several officials privately fumed at Mr. Comey’s suggestion.
२३ ऑक्टोबर, २०१५
F.B.I. director James B. Comey speculated that criticizing the police has caused crime to increase.
He wasn't reporting some study, just musing out loud at the University of Chicago Law School.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४२ टिप्पण्या:
Somehow I am more interested in criticizing such Black thugs as:
1. Select out, on a basis of race, White victims for criminal attacks at a rate very, very, much more than the reverse; And,
2. Are otherwise very busy in murdering other Blacks.
Okay, so between the blacks and "people of color" feeling especially alienated, and the fresh wound they just delivered to the conservative reformers in the Tea Party movement by pretending that nothing illegal happened at the IRS -- is there anyone left in the United States who trusts the Justice Department?
Consider the source............
The article's commenters took the bait.
It's really quite shocking when someone blurts out the truth like that.
"is there anyone left in the United States who trusts the Justice Department?"
shhhh... they're listening.
Lawlessness, redux. No one respects lawless leaders.
"...criticizing the police has caused crime to increase."
Oh. I was wondering what caused it. You sure tha's what it was?
"No one respects lawless leaders."
...until they point the gun at you. You will learn respect then, pretty damn quick.
I haven't said this in awhile, but...
buy bullets.
These days, I'm sad to say (and I do mean that), I'm almost looking forward to the fall part (you know, decline and fall...).
Sure, why not. It's the same argument used by human and civil rights groups... less, of course, class diversity, anti-native domestic and foreign policies, class warfare, politically-favored congruences, pro-choice/abortion, Planning/cannibalism, etc.
Riddle me this: How is polymorphic boron nitride more adamant than diamond?
The DOJ people aren't angry because they disagree with what he said. They know he spoke truth.
They would have been more angry if he said that more crime, poverty and anger among black people was the goal of their policies. Most especially because it is the truth.
"While the department had no immediate comment on Friday, several officials privately fumed at Mr. Comey’s suggestion."
It appears that Mr. Comey has intruded on their "safe space".
To the people who say he spoke the truth, please point to a study supporting your claim. While I don't doubt that some specific crimes are motivated by Black Lives Matter, that's not what Comey said. And using something like that as a shield to protect police misbehaviour from criticism is risible. As is defending the practice.
"And using something like that as a shield to protect police misbehaviour from criticism is risible. As is defending the practice."
They'll be first against the wall when the revolution comes, eh comrade maguire?
Terry, I love how people who obviously don't come here often accuse me of being a lefty because I'm not afraid of criticizing the police state. No, I just have the principles of a classical liberal. You might want to try them sometime (principles, instead of positions), they suit most people.
"And using something like that as a shield to protect police misbehaviour from criticism is risible"
First off, the majority of your "police misbehavior" examples turned out to be lies - Trayvon Martin, Micheal Brown, Eric Gardner, Freddie Gray, etc.
"please point to a study supporting your claim"
Fuck you and your "studies". Science has become so corrupted that we can now get a study that says whatever we want it to. And if we found your precious little "study" you would simply find any excuse to dismiss it - author is white, author donated to Koch Brothers in 1996, author's wife works for sister of man who's cousin's dogsitter eats lunch across from the police chief. ie the usual libtard deflection.
"that's not what Comey said"
What he is saying is that police are now less aggressive in stopping black crime because they don't want their lives ruined by your little Social Media lynch mobs. You guys are getting good honest black folk murdered by black thugs so you can preen on Twitter jabout how enlightened and tolerant you are.
You should avoid using the word "risible". You might just choke on it.
It's immigration, stupid.
If you can't criticize the police you live in a police state. Not a difficult choice.
It's not the police criticism, but the blanket denigration of them that has flowed from the White House. Words matter.
Pardon me, tim maguire. Who was trying to protect police misbehaviour from criticism, again?
I guess that would be no one.
AReasonableMan unreasonably wrote:
"If you can't criticize the police you live in a police state."
If you can't criticize the justice department you live in a police state, too. I guess we're just fucked.
Tim, since saying these things is probably career limiting, it was probably a) brave of him to say and b) true.
There was an old triangle drawn with the sides being labeled nice true necessary. If something is not at least two of those things you should not say it.
Th article is really weird. The author wants to isolate and shame Comey for the quote (which was speculation).
The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said on Friday that the additional scrutiny and criticism of police officers in the wake of highly publicized episodes of police brutality may have led to an increase in violent crime in some cities as officers have become less aggressive.
Notice the word may in there?
So the JD people are certain that extra scrutiny and criticism of police officers has not led to an increase in crime? Where the Hell is their data?
The article's author admits that there has been an increase in crime that roughly correlates with the BLM timeline, apparently in poor and minority areas. Good thing the JD is lookiing out for those guys! Wouldn't too much police protection in high crime areas!
The author also writes:
Among the nation’s law enforcement officials, there is sharp disagreement over whether there is any credence to the so-called Ferguson effect, which refers to the protests that erupted in the summer of 2014 in Ferguson, Mo., over a police shooting.
So Comey's qualified statement isn't really an outlier?
Holding the police accountable for civil rights violations has been a top priority at the department in recent years, and some senior officials do not believe that scrutiny of police officers has led to an increase in crime.
"Holding the police accountable for civil rights violations . . ."
"The police"? State? Local? All of them? Jeez, the NY Times needs better writers. The JD is specualting as much as Comey.
Comey went off script, again.
Maybe there is hope for the guy, though I remember him from the Martha Stewart case, and not favorably.
Being a cop in a big city is a thankless job.
---To the people who say he spoke the truth, please point to a study supporting your claim
There are plenty of studies and justice department statistics demonstrating that it is a lie that police are more violent against blacks.
'Black lives matter' is based on a lie. When you formulate governmental policy based on a lie, you get perverse and destructive results.
=======Sheriff Clarke offered this assessment during Sean Hannity’s FNC show about how the candidates conducted themselves when asked by Anderson Cooper if black lives matter.
“It was a pathetic display; it was plantation politics in its finest hour — the continued enslavement of black emotionally by the Democrat Party with this destructive liberal ideology, and they know it. They’re whoring for votes…the liberal ideology has been very destructive for the black community for the last 50 or 60 years. Poverty is now generational; it is a lifestyle. The unemployment is obscene. They have to send their kids to failing public schools. Drug and alcohol addiction; neighborhoods that are crumbling, all under Democrat control…they need to take a real message to the American people, especially to the black community, that what they have done, they deserve an apology for from the Democrat Party.”
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/2502319/democratic-debate-was-a-continuation-of-plantation-politics-says-sheriff-david-clarke-video/#q3IjChumgrOUQB2I.99=========
"several officials privately fumed at Mr. Comey’s suggestion."
I think he is getting ready to quit when Hillary is exonerated by DoJ and might be looking to be a police chief of a big city.
The only real problem with his claim is that there is no increase in violent crime or at least not one documented. 2014 showed lower crime levels and data on 2015 shows it continuing to fall or steady (it's increased in some cities; also decreased in others. This is normal).
So he's blaming a movement he doesn't like for a problem that may not exist.
The police are put in dangerous and stressful situations. If they lose it, they are mocked and criticized by the media. The media's explanation for such behavior is not the stressful situation that the cop is in but that cop's inherent racism. This is true even if, as in Baltimore, the cop is black......Darren Wilson did nothing wrong. He lost his job.
Holding the police accountable for civil rights violations has been a top priority
Particularly when DOJ has been running a campaign for five years to treat local police forces as uniformly brutal and racist, without trial nor due processes.
James Comey is right. The Federal Leviathan has intruded into every jurisdiction with its heavy-handed prejudices, and the locals have pulled in their horns and released the barely-suppressed monsters of the streets.
Mike wrote:
The only real problem with his claim is that there is no increase in violent crime or at least not one documented. 2014 showed lower crime levels and data on 2015 shows it continuing to fall or steady (it's increased in some cities; also decreased in others. This is normal).
From the article. The rise in crime is poorer neighborhoods.
But he acknowledged that there is so far no data to back up his assertion and that it may be just one of many factors that are contributing to the rise in crime, like cheaper drugs and an increase in criminals who are being released from prison.
Comey was just applying a basic principle of economics-- if the price of any good increases, demand will generally decline. There are some goods that are price inelastic over a wide range of prices but those goods are relatively rare. Applied in this context, Comey is recognizing that, from the cop' perspective, as the price of enforcing the criminal law increases, the cop's performance (enforcement activity) will decrease, especially for more marginal lawbreaking. It's hard to see that as controversial even if, in lefty-land, it is politically inconvenient to mention it. No doubt, the senior DOJ officials who prefer to pretend that basic economics doesn't apply in this context are all true believers in lefty-land fantasies. That will only change when/if the next president is not also from lefty-land.
Richard Dolan said...
the cop's performance (enforcement activity) will decrease
At which point he should be sacked, as would happen in private industry.
If all sides want the same thing, i.e. less crime, less poverty etc. you would see people working together.
If your goal is more crime and more poverty, you will see divisive rhetoric and protests and riots. Obama will be judged as failure on many points. One of them will be his fomenting a race war and divisiveness.
AReasonableMan said...
Richard Dolan said...
the cop's performance (enforcement activity) will decrease
"At which point he should be sacked, as would happen in private industry."
We should be modernizing our police forces both in strategy and tactics, assuming we all have the same goals. But we aren't for a variety of reasons. One of them is police unions. Another is that we use the law enforcer paradigm instead of the peace officer paradigm.
I doubt either problem will be addressed meaningfully because we don't all have the same goals.
Remember everyone - the Democrats represent the "reality-based community,"(tm) where a fierce dedication to truth and science triumphs over ideology.
It isn't precisely police being cautious, but also all sorts of legal measures and court rulings, or fears of them. And there have been some changes in policy. And it goes mmuch further even than just policing.
There is a pro-crime lobby.
"...some senior officials do not believe that scrutiny of police officers has led to an increase in crime."
Some do.
And some have more honesty than others in their public statements, and more truth.
What will stupid, violent people do when they believe that all, or the overwhelming majority of, police and white people are bad? What did stupid, violent peasants do when they thought Jews were bad?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा