I still find it hard to believe that the real New York City (as opposed to some city in a dystopian parallel universe) ever permitted their police to stop people at will on the streets and frisk them. This has been going on for years. Only recently did a judge finally rule what any literate Constitution-reader already knew—that such frisking is unconstitutional.
Rather than being embarrassed by the fact that New York City’s government implemented such an egregiously illegal practice, the Powers That Be are pushing back with rhetoric. Actually, it is the media that is pushing the agenda, threatening New Yorkers if they don’t submit to these procedures by cops. The Politico.com headline ran, “Kelly: ‘No question’ people will die if stop-and-frisk ends.”
“New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly says there’s ‘no question’ more people would die if the city’s next mayor ends the controversial stop-and-frisk policy, which a federal judge has struck down as unconstitutional. ‘No question about it, violent crime will go up,’ Kelly said Sunday on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press: when host David Gregory asked if more people would die…”
If you look up “government propagandist” in the dictionary, I think David Gregory is the first definition.
Yes, violent crime will go up because Ray Kelly’s shock troops, whether or not they are randomly violating the Fourth Amendment, are still one-hundred-percent dedicated to violating the Second Amendment. This is a clear instance of civil government bullying the peaceful members of society.
- The disarm all peaceful, productive citizens, specifically targeting non-criminals
- They then leave the disarmed populace desperate for some other form of protection from armed criminal predators
- Then they meet the need by turning police into a domestic occupying army and giving them unconstitutional powers.
- If a court somewhere momentarily pushes back against these unconstitutional powers, the leaders of the occupying troops goes on TV to shed crocodile tears about all the “violence” that the judge has unleashed by limiting the cities only line of defense against crime.
Why do I say under (1) “specifically targeting non-criminals”? Because that is all that passing a law can do. Lawbreakers remain unaffected—except that they suddenly gain confidence because of the government gift of an advantage.
We suffer on under the choke hold of evil crime lords embedded in our civil government. There is no reason at all that New York City or any other American urban center needs to have such high violence. If the people were not disarmed in the first place, criminals would not enjoy the happy hunting ground they now possess as a free government subsidy.
Of course, the politicians add to their perversity by blaming places that don’t as stringently violate the Second Amendment for their own urban crime rates. Gunicides in New York City or Chicago are all to be blamed on Red State gun shops.
What an amazing phenomenon! Here are all these places in flyover country where firearms and ammunition are plentiful and legal. And yet, by some magic process, all these firearms and their bullets manage to travel in peaceful non-aggression out of these areas of overflowing firepower and move all the way to certain city centers before suddenly jacking up the homicide and shooting rates.
Criminals have cars. They can still get on busses and trains without much chance of having their concealed weapons discovered. What would motivate criminals to restrain their trigger fingers all across the nation until they come into the kingdoms of Rahm Emanuel or Michael Bloomberg?