Monday, December 22, 2014

The Other Side of the Story...

Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth

In our concern for a "perfect system" and our desire for a "perfect equality" we often fail to recognize the immense sacrifices those who protect our communities make daily. Often the sacrifice is their own lives. The following Time article by Howard Safir points out what many seem to be leaving out of our national dialogue and the result is painting law enforcement officers into a collective box.

We have seen nothing but police bashing from some of the highest offices in the land.

Police lives matter. Let’s demonstrate it nationally.

Michael Brown and Eric Garner died resisting arrest. Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu died doing their job. It is a very important distinction. Michael Brown and Eric Garner were committing crimes. Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu were protecting all the citizens of New York City.

The national dialogue on proper and effective policing has been totally distorted. Activists purporting to represent the majority of the black community have been bolstered by a 24 hour news cycle that gives them unwarranted credibility. I do not believe for one minute that Al Sharpton represents the feelings of most hardworking, law abiding black American families. I know through dozens of community meetings during my time as NYC Police Commissioner that what the black community wants most is what we all want—a safe environment in which to live their lives.

There are 18,000 police departments in the United States. They interact millions of times with the public, and make hundreds of thousands of arrests. Very few result in a suspect’s death or injury. We do not have police forces out of control as the media and the Sharptons of the world would have us believe. Does that mean that there are not serious incidents of police abuse or misjudgment? Of course there are. When they take place we should investigate them thoroughly and prosecute and punish those who committed the wrong doing. We should not burn down buildings and murder police officers.

When Ismaaiyl Abdulah Brinsley brutally executed Officers Ramos and Liu he did so in an atmosphere of permissiveness and anti-police rhetoric unlike any that I have seen in 45 years in law enforcement. ...


We should all be concerned about the reaction our police officers will have. I have seen times when police bashing has resulted in officers doing the minimum necessary to complete their tours and go home safely to their families.

Those were the times when murders in New York were over 2,000, cars had “No Radio” signs in surrender to rampant auto theft, and gangs controlled the streets. I know this can happen again in spite of the sacrifice of hundreds of police officers who have given their lives while reducing violent crime across this country to historic lows.


The President should declare a national day of Support for Police. He should send a clear message to all criminals that he appreciates the willingness of officers like Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu to sacrifice their lives, and that their lives have meaning. Perhaps their families should be present at the next State of the Union.

It is indeed time to move from the twilight zone into a rational daylight zone and attack the problem and not each other. We will solve this problem only if we move forward together as brothers and sisters who have shared interests. United we stand divided we fall.

Read the full article HERE.

Via: Memeorandum


  1. "...officers doing the minimum necessary to complete their tours..."

    Considering that many more magnitudes of black people are killed by crooks and not cops, do you agree that police putting in the least effort possible would likely lead to more deaths... of blacks included?

    1. I believe it certainly is a great likelihood.

  2. Collective box? You see, the problem I have with opinionated blather of all stripes is in the tone-deafness and reactionary pushback that obfuscates every controversy. De Blasio is not the only mayor rudely treated by New York’s Police Benevolent Association. Other examples:

    In 1992, the PBA held a violent, vulgar City Hall rally against Dinkins, asking how many drug dealers he'd hugged.

    In 1997, police officers distributed fliers demanding that Mayor Giuliani be refused admittance to their funerals.

    The PBA ran ads against Bloomberg and threatened to picket the Republican National Convention in 2004.

    Known for his rabid “in your face” tactics, Patrick Lynch abuses his platform as Chairman of the PBA in defending rogue officers who have engaged in despicable acts of brutality and caused deaths while in police custody. Lynch accuses the mayor of “having blood on his hands” – an example of amplified rhetoric that fails to blame the actual perpetrator of the crime. In Patrick Lynch’s playbook, there are no rogue cops, and these never happened:

    Texas Cop In Uniform Allegedly Forced Woman To Perform Sex Act:

    The officer, David Kattner, reportedly called the woman and forced her to perform a sex act while keeping one hand on his service weapon, according to an arrest warrant affidavit obtained by the Morning News.

    Consider this extreme example of Abner Louima:

    "The arresting officers beat Louima with their fists, nightsticks, and hand-held police radios on the ride to the station. On arriving at the station house, he was strip-searched and put in a holding cell. The beating continued later, culminating with Louima being sexually assaulted in a bathroom at the 70th Precinct station house in Brooklyn. Volpe kicked Louima in the testicles, then, while Louima's hands were cuffed behind his back, he first grabbed onto and squeezed his testicles and then sodomized him with a broom handle … Volpe later admitted he was mistaken about Louima being his assailant” [Volpe is serving a 30-year term and scheduled for release in 2015].

    There are good cops and rogue cops. However, there will never be justice in an atmosphere of polarizing rhetoric that seeks to suppress one side of a story and drown out the other.

    1. I shall put it bluntly, Patrick Lunch is a dickhead. Good cops are not well served by a dickhead. The dickhead should go.

      My point really is, and you probably won't fully agree, all sides seem to be too quick to argue only their point and forget to consider other points. Unless somebody can show me differently there are a lot more competent, effective, and racially unbiased cops than the other way around.

      visit blogs on both sides that seem, probably intentionally in some cases, to be more interested in polarizing rhetoric than in honest discussion. I can be fairly certain of which cable news they watch from their posts and comments.

      It is the way it is.

      It is indeed time to move from the twilight zone into a rational daylight zone and attack the problem and not each other. We will solve this problem only if we move forward together as brothers and sisters who have shared interests. United we stand divided we fall.

    2. " ...all sides seem to be too quick to argue only their point and forget to consider other points."

      On this point, you will find me in full agreement. And it troubles me how polarizing this debate has become. Lynch has always been a divisive figure, but what shocked me was Giuliani's statements of the past few days. Having once been a victim of Lynch's overheated rhetoric, one would think Giuliani's comments would be more measured and balanced. Nope, Giuliani has turned himself into a clone of Lynch and Bill O' Reilly.

      In an Op-Ed yesterday, the Washington Post distinguished Giuliani with FOUR Pinnochios for making false and inflammatory statements.

      These days, everything that happens in the world is colored by partisanship. If I say, "What a beautiful sunrise," someone from the Cringe Fringe will say, "The sky is falling."

      It's sickening!!!

  3. Pray tell, what was Eric Garner's crime?

  4. Selling untaxed cigarettes... crime of denying the state its booty.

    Aside from that? Upsetting local businesses and being a nuisance to neighbor.

    Just in... another police officer shot and killed in MO. There will likely be more I fear.

  5. The chickens are coming home to roost from the protesters' ugly racist slogan that only "black lives matter".

    Unfortunately, RN, this might well lead to police isolated from the community and much more militarized.

    And, Garner's crime was to fail to pay the money being stolen from him by New York's wealthy elite in a legal mugging. So the muggers made him pay.

    We need to seriously reconsider the intentional repurposing of the police from "protect and serve" to being like Mafia goodfellas collecting protection money.

    1. Interesting take on "intentional repurposing of the police" dmarks. I hadn't thought of that. But the state does move in mysterious ways.

    2. Hyperole on my part? Probably. But I feel that the Garner situation requires a look at tax policy and the involvement mentioned of the police in it.

    3. To embellish upon Dmark's comment, my concern here is the dishonest turn of every debate when an incendiary union representative such as Patrick Lynch defends rogue officers just because "They carry a badge." The public has a right to question questionable police tactics, and Lynch has no right to obfuscate legitimate concerns with polarizing rhetoric. A police state is what we fear most of all.

      There is reasonable public concern over police tactics that are overly reactive with little forethought or training on non-lethal means of apprehension. All too often, the punishment does not even fit the crime - instant death meted out on the street for crimes that hardly rise to the level of misdemeanors (i.e. the Garner case). The playground killing of a 12-year old and the Walmart killing of a kid brandishing "store merchandise" are examples of deaths that were avoidable.

    4. (O)tc: the public especially has a right to question every aspect of those sectors of government authorized to use lethal force, such as the police and military. The ability to question is of course a basic right, but here I think it is the most crucial, most valuable.

  6. Les and (O)ct, how well do you think the goals and actions of the PBA and its leaders mesh with the police mission to "protect and to serve" and the officer's oath?

    Does the PBA strenghten this, or work at cross-purposes?

    1. Dmarks,
      Yours is perhaps the most important and pertinent question of this post. To be realistic, Patrick Lynch represents the interests of his rank-and-file members, not the interests of the city, or of any minority group, or of any community. Lynch is uncommonly bellicose and belligerent at his job, and his polarizing rhetoric is counter-productive, IMO. Police officers who abuse their positions – in committing unlawful acts - deserve due process under law, not union protection, or impunity under a code of silence.

      One would think that fostering a healthier relationship between police officers and their respective communities would benefit both. An atmosphere of trust and mutual understanding might even make the job of law enforcement easier, safer, and more effective. But Lynch is too rough cut, narrow-minded and unimaginative to think in such terms.

  7. The best way to see "the other side" would be to watch that press conference with Liu's widow, ''cause if that doesn't convince you, nothing will.

  8. Oct: do you see, the public interest being anywhere in Lynch ' s ranting? Or do you see, like me, that he has the mindset of a tribal warlord, out to protect his own, regardless of the cost... a very destructive mindset that is harmful and puts the public in danger??

    1. I see it basically the way you see it. If there are any shades of difference, it's merely in the phrasing.

      Nevertheless, a pity that Lynch cannot appreciate the benefits of community outreach on behalf of all stakeholders.


As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 3/4/18 Anonymous commenting has been disabled and this site has reverted to comment moderation. This unfortunate action is necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or irrelevant to the post subject.

While we appreciate and encourage all political viewpoints we feel no obligation to post comments that fail to rise to the standards of decency and decorum we have set for Rational Nation USA.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.