It’s fascinating (not in a good way) what can happen when leftist politicians and community activists, with the help of a complicit mainstream media, create a myth and then endeavor to “fix” the “problem” the myth alleges.
The myth: That America’s cops are too quick to use force and are specifically shooting and killing minorities.
Recently, the California legislature approved a Use of Force bill that virtue-signaler extraordinaire Governor Gavin Newsom is likely to sign. According to The Sacramento Bee, back in May, Governor Newsom said it was “‘an important bill’ that will ‘help restore community trust in our criminal justice system.’”
Restore trust? Yeah, after the left has done and is doing everything it can to destroy that trust. Primarily, they demonize cops and expect them to perform perfectly in an imperfect world, according to their unrealistic standards.
Recently on Fox News Channel, Laura Ingraham interviewed conservative commentator and former NYPD police officer Dan Bongino and Democrat commentator Jonathan Harris. Bongino drilled Harris a new one for his absurd views about police killing some 900 to 1,000 suspects annually over recent years.
The thing is, though that is an accurate number, Harris said it as if there were something inherently wrong with the number. Reasonable people believe the vast majority of the suspects cops kill warrant it. The problem: We’re not dealing with reasonable people, such as Jonathan Harris.
Unreasonable also applies to those who passed Assembly Bill 392 in the California Senate after a year of debate. The new law “allows officers to use deadly force based on the totality of the circumstances.”
Sounds reasonable, right? But this used to mean when the officer felt lethal force was “reasonable” under the circumstances. This bill will change the standard to “necessary” as defined by investigators (and second-guessers, politicians, critics, cop-haters, etc.), after days, weeks, and months assessing what an officer had to decide in an instant.
I know the reply to this next question will probably be a resounding “No,” which may cause more aftershocks in southern Cali. But shouldn’t the benefit of the doubt in a use of force go to the trained, sworn law enforcement officer rather than the suspected criminal? Okay, California’s Richter Scale is going off the chart.
Sadly, this law’s passage shows the disconnect between the cops they say they support and even our friends with Rs after their names. Reportedly, Sen. John Moorlach (R-Costa Mesa) said, “the bill would reduce ‘tragic and possibly preventable’ deaths.” The Bee also reported, “Dozens of law enforcement representatives from across the state, however, still oppose the measure.” Though the revised bill may be “better” than it was, that doesn’t make it good—especially for cops. But, in this one-party state, the left was going to enact something bad for law enforcement.
Unfortunately, “Many of his fellow Republicans joined him in supporting the bill,” The Bee reported. So much for a loyal opposition. Republicans always feel if they compromise across the aisle, the Democrats will reciprocate. Nope. The neo-Democrats (socialists) see it as a sign of weakness and come after more.
I’ll engage in some educated speculation here. I could be wrong, but anyone want to wager when Sen. Moorlach thought about tragic and possibly preventable deaths, just like the Democrats, he was thinking about the tragic, preventable deaths of suspects, not of law enforcement officers?