FIRST  VICTIMS  OF  THE  NEW  GSE  

  OFFICERS RAFAEL RAMOS and WENJIAN LIU have become the first casualties of, not a government-sponsored enterprise, but of GOVERNMENT SUPPORTED (Police) EXECUTION. In what can only be described as an information cascade avalanche, Obama Holder and De Blasio have pursued a course of rhetoric condemning police officers, which became the flashpoint that has led to unsubstantiated protests and the deaths of officers Liu and Ramos. Although these officers were minorities, they evidently were not the minorities Obama, Holder and De Blasio so vociferously portrayed as persecuted. This is not about police training, having dialogues or opening conversations. It is about bad blacks behaving inordinately badly. The misapplications and calculations about police conduct perpetuating imprisoned blacks or blacks being stopped disparately in relation to other races has not borne out neither in the courts or in the empirical facts about black criminal conduct. There is nothing disparate about black criminal conduct. It is a fact. Ask their victims. Its not made up. To deduce that because blacks are stopped or imprisoned in larger proportional numbers than other races, the police must be doing wrong is spurious and devoid of any profound study and analysis. I challenge the race baiters and police haters to think outside this prejudicial mindset that the police are inherently abusive or racist. What appears to be “racial profiling” and “disparate” application of the law is actually the attempt to

preserve the public and quasi-public spaces that the police are only allowed access to. From a legalistic aspect, but for probable cause, the police have no authority to intrude upon the people. Police operate from two limited aspects; conspicuousness or complaint. The poorer one is, the more likely the use of public spaces is necessary. As one’s income level increases so to does their ability to acquire or access more private spaces. The police are excluded from private spaces unless called upon by those who control that space. Primarily, the poor and the police lawfully occupy these public spaces as well as some quasi-public spaces long after the general public has retired into their own private spaces. Such public spaces are streets, sidewalks, parks, public housing projects, public pools, public transit, etc. Quasi-public spaces are places like malls, strip malls, greenbelts, parking lots, parking structures, vacant land, abandoned housing etc. And to some degree front yards of homes and other structures where public access in not restricted. The government by regulation imposes substantial restrictions on these public/quasi-public spaces and then orders the police to execute these regulations; legally referred to as mala prohibita crimes. Taillight out? Cops got you. Jaywalking? Cops got you. In the park too late? Cops got you. These are the kinds of offenses that make for legal intrusion by the police. I will defer in this article discussing crimes against persons. Everyone needs to understand that a police officer in your presence, absent probable cause, is being intrusive. Intrusion is what the constitution guards against. Police administrators have consistently failed to propagate to the general public the constructs and solemnity of police intrusion and have opted instead to attempt to befriend rather than inform them. In other words if a police officer begins talking to you without probable cause, the court will look at your conversation as implied consent (consensual encounter). While a police officer may personally engage you in conversation and you agree with the officer doing so, what you say or what the officer observes may end up against your best interest or, as I used to do, used against someone else’s interest. This is not provincial; across the country those with no, to limited private spaces have to share public spaces with the police. The police in turn attempt to maintain order in this venue. Then an officer sees two black men walking on the street instead of the sidewalk, while also aware of a robbery that has just occurred. Maybe the officer should wait and call Obama; have a beer summit perhaps…. Politicians need to know what police officers already do; poor black communities are the most difficult to police because of the bad people that exploit and abuse

these public spaces. Ironically the limited hard charging officers gravitate to where they're needed most. There is a very thin blue line of aggressive well-meaning police officers whose pursuits are in the interest of “catching the bad guy” and making the law abiding safer. These self-initiators are relatively small in number in police departments across the country and there going to get even smaller if metamessages like those espoused by Obama, Holder and De Blasio persist; a nod and a wink to black misbehavior…its not you its them (the police). Racial profiling has consistently been debunked, the most famous of which was the New Jersey Turnpike study. By then however the Superintendent of the New Jersey State Police was fired and the agency subjected to a federal consent decree. The real results were unceremoniously received or in retrospect probably ignored altogether. This is what Maxfield and Kelling the authors of the study found: 1. Black drivers were in greater proportion of all drivers in that sector of the

turnpike 2. Black drivers exceeded the speed limit by 15mph or higher

3. On southern sectors of the turnpike the risk of any vehicle being stopped was

substantially higher Apply these findings to public spaces used by those with limited private spaces and the same results will manifest; a particular race or ethnic group (any ghetto USA) in a given area with greater numbers than other ethnic groups, observable breeches of the law and probable cause for police intrusion. Since racial profiling is merely a mindset it can only manifest in behavior through falsity. That is to say any officer targeting an individual because of race would have to lie about both reasonable suspicion and probable cause to the exclusion of due process. This is not likely a systemic condition and if it is an individual one that individual’s career would be short lived. Making up stories to stop or arrest people based on race has a very short life cycle. But in reality you here of almost no officers that are being prosecuted for such things as falsifying reports, false imprisonment, false arrest or perjury. What does the law say about an officer’s mindset?

• In Whren v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that a police officer's subjective motivation for stopping a motorist on the highway was irrelevant as long as an objectively reasonable basis--such as a traffic violation existed for making the stop. (https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-62365840/pretext-stops-and-racial-profiling-after-whren-v)

The point here is since racial profiling is not a tangible activity the bias must take

form outside the law. If an officer is intruding upon an individual based on “specific and articulable facts” (reasonable suspicion) then it doesn’t matter what that officer is thinking. A police chief conveyed this very succinctly; “I can’t control what’s in your head but I can control your behavior. I have been aware of less than a handful of incidents where there was deliberate planning in the assassination of a police officer; Detective Thomas C Williams (LAPD) , Officer Thomas J Steiner (CHP) and the four Lakewood, Washington police officers come to mind. (Here I exclude officers killed while in the process of an encounter, a KIA if you will) Officers Ramos and Liu were assassinated; an assassination which was fueled by the lethal rhetoric of Obama, Holder and De Blasio, the triumvirate of the new unofficial GOVERNMENT SUPPORTED (Police) EXECUTIONS. At no time in my life can I recall the government influencing such villainy. In the newest of maladies; governmental autosacrophagy, Obama, Holder and De Blasio are participating in the affirmation of a debunked hypothesis, giving unwarranted credence to the likes of Al Sharpton and are luring both guilty whites and fearful whites to an indefensible cause of abrogating police authority. In the process however they have givien death sentences to who knows how many more unsuspecting police officers in this land we reference as home of the brave and land of the free Let’s throw the bums out.