Friday, May 29, 2020

AMERICAN RACIST HATE GROUP THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER'S WAR ON AMERICA

THE ENTIRE REASON THE GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY WANTS ILLEGALS VOTING BY MAIL IS TO DESTROY THE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM. WE ONLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE DEMOCRAT SANCTUARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO SEE THEIR MEXICAN WELFARE STATE SUPPORTED BY ALL DEMOCRAT BILLIONAIRES FOR CHEAP LABOR.



13% of the population in the USA is black
BUT THEY COMMIT 85% of all violent interracial crimes, 80% of all shootings, 79% of all robberies, 59% of all murders, 52% of all violent juvenile crimes, 45% of all drug offenses..
49% of all murder victims are black. 42% of all cop killers are black.
99% of all major riots involving property damage, looting and civil disobedience are committed by blacks as opposed to ANY OTHER minority in America.
93% of all black murder victims are murdered by another black.
33% of all crimes in America are committed by 3% of the population; blacks between the ages of 16 and 36
8% of America’s population are black men, yet they account for 40% of America’s total prison population.
40% of blacks are on welfare
Only 59% blacks graduate high school (Detroit, only 20%)
Over 60% of black households have no fathers present
72% of black mothers are unwed!
Blacks account for 38% of abortions (only 13% of population and contraceptives are FREE)
(STATISTICS FROM Dept. of Justice, Dept. of Commerce, FBI and USA Census (ALL and sect.5 Law Enforcement))



“The SPLC's massive blacklist is sustained by a powerful movement on the left and in the Democratic Party, which is determined to suppress its conservative opposition and create a one-party state — a feat it has already accomplished in our colleges and universities and in large swathes of our media institutions.”

The Biggest Blacklist in American History

How this anti-American scourge works.
May 29, 2020 
John Perazzo

The left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is a $592 million non-profit. It is also the creator and leader of the largest blacklist, by far, in American history. Its infamous list of “hate groups,” which currently consists of 940 separate entities in all 50 U.S. states, is the centerpiece of a massive smear campaign that conflates a small number of mostly insignificant fringe groups with entities whose sin is being politically conservative, but which are not “hate” groups in any meaningful sense of the word.

By equating a smattering of actual hate groups with respectable conservative organizations, SPLC seeks to delegitimize conservatives as repugnant monsters whose viewpoints do not merit a hearing. And by labeling mainstream conservative individuals and organizations as “hate mongers,” it seeks to deprive them of the funding they need to reach an audience or even stay alive. Consider, for instance, the SPLC's branding of David Horowitz, founder of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, as an “anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim extremist” and as one of the “10 Most Dangerous Hatemongers” in the United States — solely because he opposes illegal immigration and warns against the dangers of Islamic jihad.

After Horowitz gave a speech to the bi-partisan American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in August 2018, SPLC organized a boycott that singled out his remarks as worthy of suppression and called on ALEC’s corporate sponsors to withdraw their support. The actual sin Horowitz committed was confined to one sentence in which he referred to Black Lives Matter as a “racist organization” and the Muslim Brotherhood as a “terrorist” group.[1] Within two weeks, 79 leftist organizations had joined the boycott.
BLOG: THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S LA RAZA SUPREMACIST FASCIST PARTY NOW CALLING ITSELF UNIDOus IS FUNDED BY MOST OF THE FORTUNE 500 HUNDRED AS THEY BENEFIT FROM UNCONTROLLED INVASION OF ‘CHEAP’ LABOR BY MEXICO.
This led to the withdrawal of financial support by major corporations like Verizon, AT&T, and Dow Chemical, and the loss of tens of thousands of dollars for ALEC.

The following month, SPLC’s slurs were the basis of major media attacks smearing Republican gubernatorial candidate Ron DeSantis as a “white supremacist” for appearing at a Restoration Weekend event hosted by Horowitz, who was described as “an infamous racist” in a headline that appeared in the Huffington Post. (As a side note to this baseless slander, Horowitz is a friend of Arianna Huffington — who founded but no longer owns the Post — and was married in her home.)

The SPLC blacklist is enabled by — and could not be successful without — the mindless support of media outlets like the Washington PostNew York Magazine, Vanity Fair, and so-called “liberal” organizations like People for the American Way and Common Cause.
It is also empowered by major support from billionaires like Apple CEO Tim Cook and JP Morgan chairman Jamie Dimon, and by the charitable arms of such major American corporations as Amazon.

Amazon's alliance with SPLC is institutionalized in its popular “AmazonSmile” program, through which customers can purchase Amazon products at their regular prices and then indicate, at checkout, that they wish to have Amazon redirect 0.5% of the payment to a charitable nonprofit organization of the customer's choice. In fiscal 2018, AmazonSmile funneled some $44 million to non-profits via this program.

But not every governmentally recognized non-profit is eligible to receive Amazon’s largesse. Amazon warns its customers that “organizations that engage in, support, encourage, or promote intolerance, hate, terrorism, violence, money laundering, or other illegal activities are not eligible to participate.” Among the organizations denied Amazon charity on these grounds is the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the chief legal non-profit group committed to protecting religious liberty. ADF is ineligible for Amazon’s program because it defends the First Amendment rights of religious organizations to hold views that SPLC doesn’t support.

ADF, by its own telling, provides legal advocacy “for the right of people to freely live out their faith,” with a specific focus on “cases involving religious liberty issues, the sanctity of human life, and marriage and family.” In other words, ADF thinks that if a religious organization opposes taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand, or believes that marriage should be defined explicitly as a sacramental union between one man and one woman, such an entity should be allowed, in accordance with the First Amendment, to freely espouse those particular values.

But to the leftists at the Southern Poverty Law Center, the defense of the First Amendment by organizations like ADF is a “hateful” endeavor which merits the group's inclusion in the SPLC blacklist. And AmazonSmile, in turn, has dutifully declared itself off-limits to ADF. As one AmazonSmile spokesperson has acknowledged: “We remove organizations that the SPLC deems as ineligible.” And by that chain of unexamined “evidence” — i.e., the mere word of SPLC — the blacklist works.

ADF is just one of scores of mainstream religious organizations that have been targeted by SPLC. In particular, SPLC depicts any entity objecting to transformative cultural changes involving homosexuals — such as gay marriage — as a “hate” group whose opinions have no more legitimacy than those of an Aryan militia. In this way, SPLC classifies the conservative Family Research Council, a Christian public policy ministry, as yet another purveyor of hate. And in accordance with SPLC's guidance, AmazonSmile has removed the Council from the list of charities eligible to receive AmazonSmile donations.

The D. James Kennedy Ministries (DJKM), whose mission is to proclaim “the Gospel of Jesus Christ” as widely as possible, likewise opposes the notion that marriage should be redefined to include same-sex unions. Consequently, SPLC has defamed DJKM as yet another “active hate group.” And AmazonSmile, in turn, refuses to direct any of its customer funds to DJKM. But in fact, there is not the faintest trace of “hate” in DJKM's message. As Ministries spokesman John Rabe has said: “We desire all people, with no exceptions, to receive the love of Christ and his forgiveness and healing. We unequivocally condemn violence, and we hate no one.”

Other noteworthy Christian groups blacklisted by both SPLC and AmazonSmile include the Religious Freedom Coalition (RFC), the Ruth Institute, and the Saint Benedict Center — all of which are guilty of the apparently unpardonable sin of opposing same-sex marriage on religious grounds. When a spokesman for the Saint Benedict Center, Brother André Marie, asked Amazon to explain why his Center had been barred from participating in AmazonSmile, the company told him candidly: “We rely on the Southern Poverty Law Center to determine which charities are in certain ineligible categories. You have been excluded from the AmazonSmile program because the Southern Poverty Law Center lists Saint Benedict Center Inc. in an ineligible category.”

In stark contrast to its shabby treatment of the aforementioned Christian groups, AmazonSmile has had absolutely no objection to passing along 0.5% of its customer expenditures to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which was co-founded by individuals with close ties to Hamas — a proudly genocidal organization of murderous Jew-haters. Terrorism expert Steven Emerson, citing federal law-enforcement sources and internal documents, has bluntly described CAIR as “a radical fundamentalist front group for Hamas.”

AmazonSmile is likewise happy to funnel some of its customer funds to the Islamic Center of Jersey City (ICJC), an institution whose imam, in a recent sermon, not only characterized Israeli Jews as “apes and pigs,” but also besought Allah's assistance in killing them, right “down to the very last one.” Moreover, a former ICJC imam was a Hamas activist who was named on a “List of Possible Unindicted Co-conspirators for the [1993] World Trade Center Bombing.”

The Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) — a Jew-hating entity that praises terror attacks, supports the imposition of Sharia Law, promotes the establishment of an Islamic caliphate, has ties to the radical Pakistani group Jamaat-e-Islami, and is closely linked to the Muslim Brotherhood — is also an AmazonSmile member in perfectly good standing.

Similarly, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which promotes Sharia Law and Islamic supremacism, is free to rake in loads of cash through AmazonSmile. Established by U.S-based members of the Muslim Brotherhood, ISNA was identified by declassified FBI memos as a Brotherhood front group as early as 1987. Four years after that, ISNA was explicitly named in a Brotherhood document as one of 29 likeminded Islamic organizations that shared the common goal of carrying out a “grand Jihad” in America and “destroying … Western civilization from within.” But it's not a “hate group,” according to the cheerful, grinning folks at AmazonSmile and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Obviously, the double standards of AmazonSmile are many. But perhaps most troubling is the fact that the single most noteworthy beneficiary of the program is none other than the Southern Poverty Law Center itself. That's correct: The principal gatekeeper that determines who should, and who should not, be permitted to earn money through AmazonSmile, routinely stuffs its own deep pockets with AmazonSmile cash. Indeed, SPLC is currently the 33rd leading recipient of contributions through AmazonSmile. This of course is in keeping with SPLC's legendary aptitude for wringing every last penny out of every cash cow in the proverbial barn. Today SPLC boasts a $592 million endowment, of which nearly 30% is sheltered in offshore tax havens.

In their crusade against conservative organizations, SPLC and AmazonSmile have plenty of company. For instance, Color of Change has pressured corporations to cut all business and commercial ties to entities that SPLC designates as “hate groups.”

Similarly, BloodMoney.org will not be satisfied until all “financial service companies” stop “profiting from hate” by “tolerating the use of their services by hate groups.” In short, BloodMoney favors the blacklisting and economic suffocation of conservative groups in much the same way as AmazonSmile does. Particularly remarkable is the fact that BloodMoney has named none other than Amazon as a company guilty of conducting business with various “hate groups” that pursue “dangerous agendas.” In other words, AmazonSmile's blacklist doesn't go far enough for BloodMoney, which boasts that, as a result of its own blacklisting efforts, “158 funding sources have been removed from white supremacist sites.”

In 2017, Discover, Visa, MasterCard, and PayPal — much like AmazonSmile — blacklisted a number of organizations deemed objectionable by self-anointed arbiters of “hate” like SPLC, Color of Change, and BloodMoney. As PayPal said in a statement at that time, its own objective was to “ensure that our services are not used to accept payments or donations for activities that promote hate, violence or racial intolerance.”

While aiming to deprive conservative organizations of funding from a host of sources, leftist entities like Amazon and SPLC unapologetically seek to pack as much cash as possible into their own massive coffers. Business Insider recently published an article speculating that Amazon founder Jeff Bezos is on track to become the world's first trillionaire by the year 2026. And if present trends continue, the Southern Poverty Law Center's holdings may surpass the $1 billion mark at just about that same time. Such a parallel would be a fitting reflection of AmazonSmile's unique relationship with SPLC — one gang of reckless slanderers lining the pockets of another, in an obscenely crooked, rigged charade.

The SPLC's massive blacklist is sustained by a powerful movement on the left and in the Democratic Party, which is determined to suppress its conservative opposition and create a one-party state — a feat it has already accomplished in our colleges and universities and in large swathes of our media institutions
.
Notes:
[1] The full text of the speech is available HERE.

NO PEOPLE, WHITEY DID NOT MAKE BLACKS VIOLENT! WE DO NOT HAVE TO PUT UP WITH BLACK VIOLENCE!!!


Footage emerges from Minneapolis of a mob attacking a wheelchair-bound woman



For the past three days, Americans have been watching with shock, horror, and some bemusement the speed with which Minneapolis's Black Lives Matter protests about George Floyd’s death have morphed into a looting frenzy. Stealing things never sates a mob, though. Physical violence usually follows. So it is that one of the most disturbing images from the riots shows a howling mob brutally attacking Jennifer, a woman in a wheelchair, who took it upon herself to defend the entrance to a Target store.
Subsequent information, however, has emerged suggesting that there’s more to the story than first meets the eye. Having said that, though, nothing justifies the brutal attack against Jennifer as she stationed herself outside a door of a Target that Minneapolis rioters were looting:
Now that you’ve watched the video, here are the caveats, none of which excuses the mob, but some of which suggest that Jennifer isn’t quite the innocent she seems. First, there is footage showing that a woman who probably is Jennifer could walk:
Of course, being able to walk doesn’t mean you don’t need to rely heavily on a wheelchair. We’ve all known people who can walk limited distances but who must still use a wheelchair for most of their mobility.
Second, Jennifer’s not old. In footage of her after the event, you can see that she’s probably in her thirties or forties:
Jennifer’s younger age doesn’t excuse what happened to her. It just makes her an ever-so-slightly less sympathetic victim.
Third, it is true that Jennifer had a knife. The blade was about two inches long. You can see her wave it both in the footage showing her walking and in the footage where she’s stationed outside the store. Apparently, she was stabbing people with the knife as they left Target with their stolen goods.
I don’t know the law in Minnesota, but as a general rule, it’s illegal to use lethal force against a property crime when you’re not personally at risk. Of course, both the looters and the surrounding mob could have protected themselves by leaving her (and the Target) alone. Instead, they attacked her with unparalleled ferocity.
Fourth, what Jennifer did was foolhardy. If you’re in a wheelchair, you're asking for trouble if you put yourself between a large corporate enterprise and a looting mob, especially if you're armed with a small knife that inflames their passions rather than protesting you.
With those caveats in mind, what’s fascinating, in an ugly way, is the self-righteousness of the people attacking Jennifer, as well as their Twitter supporters. The mobs’ members are looting a store – that is, engaged in criminal behavior – yet the response to Jennifer’s being attacked is high dudgeon that, despite being handicapped, she is trying to protect against a property crime (with the caveat that her conduct may be illegal). Additionally, many people saw Jennifer as a racial predator, not a victim of the mob:
The “Gypsy Rose” reference is to Gypsy Rose Blanchard, who murdered her Munchausen mother after the latter forced her into a wheelchair for years.
It’s noteworthy that this dudgeon was missing eight months ago when a mob of black men outside a Target store brutally beat a white man whose cell phone they wished to steal:

Likewise, there were no riots when a black man threw a little white boy off a balcony at Minneapolis’s Mall of America, almost killing the child. (Thankfully, the child seems to have recovered well.)
As always, pay attention to the fact that (with apologies to Tom Wolfe), the dark night of racism and income inequality is always descending in America’s conservative heartland and yet lands only in its Democrat-run cities. Leftist policies created this situation because Democrat-run cities have abandoned the rule of law and the free market in favor of policies that see the government try to force economic and racial outcomes.


THE DEPRAVED GHETTO BLACK CULTURE IN AMERICA  - Is it the world’s most violent subculture?




Dr. Williams comments on another reality: that the rate of black homicide and armed robbery as well as other violent crimes are as is as much as 15–30 times more than whites

So, we have local black gang associates posting 

terror threats on social media -- threats of murder, 

by burning, directed at the women and children 

family members of white police employees -- 

immediately before the murder, by burning, of the 

white teenage daughter of a local police 

department employee. Plus, the killing took place 

only minutes after the victim was seen on video at 

the same location as the husband or boyfriend of 

the person who posted the threats, as he was filling

a handheld can with gasoline.


WINDOW INTO THE DEPRAVED BLACK SUBCULTURE 
Heather Mac Donald

Public safety
The Social Order
As for interracial violence generally, blacks disproportionately commit it. Between 2012 and 2015, there were 631,830 violent interracial victimizations, excluding homicide, between blacks and whites, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Blacks, who make up 13 percent of the U.S. population, committed 85.5 percent of  those victimizations, or 540,360 felonious assaults on  whites, while whites, 61 percent of the population, committed 14.4 percent, or 91,470 felonious assaults on blacks. Regarding threats to blacks from the police, a police officer is 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.


Anti-cop activist Shaun King says that his involvement in the campaign around the Jazmine Barnes murder was not driven by reports that a white man had killed the seven-year-old girl, who was gunned down in Houston on December 30. According to Barnes’s mother and 15-year-old sister, the white driver of a pickup truck had pulled up next to the family’s car before opening fire. The accusation set off a frenzy of hate-crime allegations and blanket coverage by the New York Times. King offered a $100,000 reward to anyone who located the suspect. 
As it turned out, Jazmine Barnes was killed by two black men, who opened fire on her mother’s car because they thought that they were targeting enemies of their gang. King passed along a tip about the real killers to the Houston police, and now says that he merely “internalized the pain of the family and tried to search as if it were my own child who was killed.” Race, in other words, had nothing to do with his activism. 
It’s worth remembering, though, the many other black children who have been victims of drive-by shootings without leading King to launch a national crusade.
A sampling: in March 2015, a six-year-old boy was killed in a drive-by shooting on West Florissant Avenue in St. Louis, as Black Lives Matter protesters were converging on the Ferguson, Missouri, Police Department to demand the resignation of the entire department. In August 2015, a nine-year-old girl was killed by a bullet from a drive-by shooting in Ferguson while doing her homework in her bedroom, blocks from the Black Lives Matter rioting thoroughfare. Five children were shot in Cleveland over the 2015 Fourth of July weekend. A seven-year-old boy was killed in Chicago that same weekend by a bullet intended for his father. In Cincinnati, in July 2015, a four-year-old girl was shot in the head and a six-year-old girl was left paralyzed and partially blind from two separate drive-by shootings. In Cleveland, three children five and younger were killed in September 2015, leading the black police chief to break down in tears and ask why the community only protests shootings of blacks when the perpetrator is a cop. In November 2015, a nine-year-old in Chicago was lured into an alley and killed by his father’s gang enemies; the father refused to cooperate with the police. All told, ten children under the age of ten were killed in Baltimore in 2015; twelve victims were between the age of ten and seventeen. 

In 2016, a three-year-old girl in Baltimore was partially paralyzed by a drive-by shooting. In Chicago in 2016, two dozen children under the age of 12 were shot in drive-bys, including a three-year-old boy mowed down on Father’s Day 2016 who is now paralyzed for life and a ten-year-old boy shot in August; his pancreas, intestines, kidney, and spleen were torn apart. A Jacksonville 22-month-old was shot to death by a passing car last June. In September, three men killed three-year-old Azalya Anderson in a drive-by in Sacramento, and a week before Christmas in Bridgeport, a 12-year-old boy was shot and killed on his way home from the candy store in a drive-by shooting.
Why did King let these shootings of black children go by without responding as he did to Jazmine Barnes’s murder? Could it be because the perpetrators were black? You could end all white shootings of black children tomorrow and it would have zero effect on the death rate of black children by homicide, because such white-on-black shootings are extremely rare. Moral abominations, like the 2015 Charleston church massacre by white supremacist Dylann Roof, are aberrations that belong to the outermost lunatic fringe of American society. The country’s revulsion at the Charleston carnage was immediate and universal, resulting in a movement to banish the Confederate flag, embraced by Roof as a white supremacist symbol, from official sites. 
If Shaun King and other Black Lives Matter activists really want to save black children from the trauma of urban violence, they should put their efforts into rebuilding inner-city culture—above all, by revalorizing a married father as the best gift a mother can give her child. Fantasies about white violence against “black bodies” are a distraction from what is actually happening on American streets.
Heather Mac Donald is the Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing editor of City Journal, and the author of The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe and The Diversity Delusion: How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture.



Walter Williams tackles the elephant in the room on crime



Dr. Williams is a well known conservative economist and longtime John Olin Chair faculty at George Mason University in eastern Virginia, author of 12 books and syndicated columnist.  In the past, he has been substitute host on the Rush Limbaugh radio program.  He is almost like family to me, and I have benefited from his essays and books over the years.  This past week, I saw and read his essay on disparities in crime rates among races that was picked up by Military in its October 2019 issue.  What got Dr. Williams going was the article by  Matthew DeLisi of Iowa State U and John Paul Wright of the U of Cincinnati titled "What Criminologists Don't Say and Why."
Dr. Williams confirms that the writers are right about the liberal tilt of criminologists — "If criminologists have the guts to even talk about a race-crime connection, it's behind closed doors and in guarded language.  Any discussion about race and crime ... can mean the end of one's professional career."  
Dr. Williams points out teen black-on-white predatory behavior — chronicled in detail by many, particularly Colin Flaherty, whose investigative reports appear frequently (more than 100) at American Thinker — cannot be reported, mentioned, or considered by the media, politicians,  criminologists, commentators, politicians, even law enforcement people without risking being called racist, the easy epithet used to enforce a ban on talking about the realities of racial disparities in crime and the increasingly violent nature of black violence against whites — the knockout game, polar bear hunting, flash mob violence against people and property.
Referencing the Wright and DeLisi report, Dr. 

Williams comments on another reality: that 

the rate of black homicide and armed robbery 

as well as other violent crimes are as is as 

much as 15–30 times more than whites, for example, and he points out the silliness of criminologists' claims that mass incarceration rather than criminality has decimated the black community.  He favorably quotes Wright and DeLisi when they say, "What they [criminals] did, in reality was to prey on their neighbors."
Dr. Williams returns to a theme he has explored many times before in this essay and commentary when he points out that the black family of the past was two parents and stable, even back to days of slavery, and that the black community was moral and law-abiding.  "The strong character of black people is responsible for the great progress made from emancipation to today. ... [T]oday's conduct among black youth wouldn't have been tolerated yesteryear."
My regret is there aren't enough Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell types to engage the nutty attitudes of liberal chatterbox experts.

John Dale Dunn, M.D., J.D. is an emergency physician, sheriff's medical officer and inactive attorney, policy and science adviser to the American Council on Science and Health of NYC and the Heartland Institute of Chicago.
  
CITY JOURNAL
BLACK ON BLACK VIOLENCE Data,

of crime and policing than this weekend’s demonstrations suggest.


The FBI released its official crime tally for 2016 today, and the data flies in the face of the rhetoric that professional athletes rehearsed in revived Black Lives Matter protests over the weekend.  Nearly 900 additional blacks were killed in 2016 compared with 2015, bringing the black homicide-victim total to 7,881. Those 7,881 “black bodies,” in the parlance of Ta-Nehisi Coates, are 1,305 more than the number of white victims (which in this case includes most Hispanics) for the same period, though blacks are only 13 percent of the nation’s population. The increase in black homicide deaths last year comes on top of a previous 900-victim increase between 2014 and 2015.
Who is killing these black victims? Not whites, and not the police, but other blacks. In 2016, the police fatally shot 233 blacks, the vast majority armed and dangerous, according to the Washington Post. The Post categorized only 16 black male victims of police shootings as “unarmed.” That classification masks assaults against officers and violent resistance to arrest. Contrary to the Black Lives Matter narrative, the police have much more to fear from black males than black males have to fear from the police. In 2015, a police officer was 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male was to be killed by a police officer. Black males have made up 42 percent of all cop-killers over the last decade, though they are only 6 percent of the population. That 18.5 ratio undoubtedly worsened in 2016, in light of the 53 percent increase in gun murders of officers—committed vastly and disproportionately by black males. Among all homicide suspects whose race was known, white killers of blacks numbered only 243. 
Violent crime has now risen by a significant amount for two consecutive years. The total number of violent crimes rose 4.1 percent in 2016, and estimated homicides rose 8.6 percent. In 2015, violent crime rose by nearly 4 percent and estimated homicides by nearly 11 percent. The last time violence rose two years in a row was 2005–06.  The reason for the current increase is what I have called the Ferguson Effect. Cops are backing off of proactive policing in high-crime minority neighborhoods, and criminals are becoming emboldened. Having been told incessantly by politicians, the media, and Black Lives Matter activists that they are bigoted for getting out of their cars and questioning someone loitering on a known drug corner at 2 AM, many officers are instead just driving by. Such stops are discretionary; cops don’t have to make them. And when political elites demonize the police for just such proactive policing, we shouldn’t be surprised when cops get the message and do less of it. Seventy-two percent of the nation’s officers say that they and their colleagues are now less willing to stop and question suspicious persons, according to a Pew Research poll released in January 2016. The reason is the persistent anti-cop climate. 
Four studies came out in 2016 alone rebutting the charge that police shootings are racially biased. If there is a bias in police shootings, it works in favor of blacks and against whites. That truth has not stopped the ongoing demonization of the police—including, now, by many of the country’s ignorant professional athletes. The toll will be felt, as always, in the inner city, by the thousands of law-abiding people there who desperately want more police protection. 



No comments: