NYPD Commissioner: We keep arresting armed criminals, yet judges keep releasing them and won’t enforce gun laws.

Share:

NEW YORK CITY, N.Y. — There is likely a myriad of things that people want for Christmas this year.

Maybe a PS5 (good luck), perhaps their small business being allowed to open back up, or maybe a sequel to 1987’s Masters of the Universe starring Dolph Lundgren (maybe I am alone in that thought). 

But what NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea wants this year is for laws intended to keep guns out of the hands of criminals to actually be dealt with properly after suspects are arrested. 

Call it what you will: gun crime, gun-related offenses, illegally obtained weapons — there is a variety of ways to describe varying degrees of criminal conduct involving firearms. 

And on December 17, Commissioner Shea said the laws that are on the books in New York City related to prosecuting these sort of offenses carry about as much weight as the paper they were drafted on:

“It is Christmastime, so I’ll ask for one thing under the Christmas tree. We need to get serious about guns.”

Even with the proverbial deck stacked against the NYPD in the forms of officers high-tailing it from the department and the infamous defunding the NYPD endured, the department has managed to increase gun-related arrests by roughly 27% in 2020.

But once an officer enacts an arrest, everything else that transpires from there is out of the NYPD’s proverbial hands.

And with the NYPD expending heavy resources to counteract individuals engaging in criminal acts with weapons, it can be frustrating when the judicial process is conducted so leniently. 

Commissioner Shea noted that the NYPD needs some sort of respite in this regard: 

“From a policing perspective, we expend so much of our resources on that. We need help.”

Lending an honest perspective, Commissioner Shea explained that when criminals are let off easy, then these tough-on-crime gun laws simply do not “exist”:

“Everyone in the criminal justice system knows this.”

The infamous open-secret, the taboo that must not be spoken, the elephant in the room that no one wants to address — Commissioner Shea likened laws on the books meant to curtail gun-related offenses to nothing more than paper tigers. 

And Commissioner Shea noted that if these judicial follies of leniency are to continue, then there could at least be better “transparency” and employed discretion in the process:

“Prosecutors, judges having discretion — maybe they want to give the person a second chance, maybe they’re gonna give them supervised release.”

“But listen, if you’re giving them supervised release, transparency is not just good for the police department. Transparency is good for all the parts of the criminal justice system.”

The manner in which things are currently playing out judicially, according to Commissioner Shea, there is hardly any visibility into who is getting iterations of supervised release after their arrest, and what said supervision even looks like:

“Let’s have some data on how many people were placed on supervised release. How many in-person meetings there were, who goes to school, who has a job. None of this exists.”

“It’s just a buzzword that the advocates insert with no real repercussions.”

He explained that if gun-related criminal cases are being handled effectively during the judicial process, then it serves as a win-win for all involved:

“If we focus on guns, we can keep incarceration down, we can improve public safety in neighborhoods. We can all work together, and we don’t have to throw everyone in jail.”

But with resources for the NYPD being stretched thin in concurrence with letting suspected criminals out of jail frivolously, Commissioner Shea says those aspects contribute to some of the increases in crime the city has seen:

“We’ve had a lot less cops in some of those neighborhoods that need them the most. That’s a fact, and that certainly has contributed to some of the crime.”

At the end of the day, Commissioner Shea pointed out that all the NYPD can do is make the arrest — what happens from that point on, the department has little influence over:

“We’re one part of the criminal justice system. We’re not the jury. We’re not the prosecutors. We’re not the system that puts ankle bracelets on.”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

Caught on Camera: Jemele Hill asks if it was ‘racist’ to knock out Nate Robinson in a boxing match

December 11, 2020

 

LOS ANGELES, CA — Good question:  Is a white person beating a minority in competitive sports racist?

Of course not, but the left is going there after a black former NBA player was knocked out cold in a recent boxing match by a white man who is generally known for being annoying online.

Jemele Hill asked Jake Paul point blank in an interview if he felt that beating his opponent was “racist.”  Yes, winning a boxing match is now considered “racist,” according to Hill.

Jemele Hill, a sports journalist who writes for The Atlantic, spent 12 years with ESPN.  She has made some of the most audacious and mind-boggling statements about race and prejudices that have ever been recorded. 

It’s only natural that she “went there” this week when interviewing Jake Paul, a YouTube “star” who is regarded for being annoying, who participated in a boxing match with former NBA star Nate Robinson.  Robinson was a point guard for the New York Knicks at the end of his basketball career that spanned from 2005—2018.

Jake Paul knocked Nate Robinson out in a devastating manner, showing surprising boxing talent for a YouTube guy, embarrassing Robinson in his second professional fight.

There are several questions that immediately come to mind:

  • Is Jemele Hill advocating for segregated sports or advocating for deeper racism?
  • Is a white person beating a minority in competitive sports racist?
  • Should Jake Paul have “thrown” the fight because of white privilege?
  • Was Nate Robinson either serious or prepared?
  • Is Jake Paul a serious fighter?

Jake Paul must think he’s serious. After the fight, Paul challenged UFC champ Conor McGregor to a match and also signed up to fight boxing legend Floyd Mayweather in an exhibition bout.  That means Mayweather agreed.

Brian DeRocha commented:

“It’s funny how microphones find their way into the hands of people who have no grasp of ‘sport.’ Their ethno-political agendas have stolen their minds. Racists.”

Cari Champion joined Jemele Hill and Jake Paul in the interview, and appeared to play “devil’s advocate” toward Hill and her ridiculously obnoxious line of questioning.

During the exchange between Jemele Hill and Jake Paul on her show, it’s initially hard to know if she’s being serious, but after the fog clears, it appears that she is:

“Hill:  ‘Considering where we are right now in our racial conversation in America, was what you did to Nate Robinson racist?’

“Champion:  ‘That is the question of the week.’ 

“Paul:  ‘Nah, stop playin’ with me, come on.’

“Hill:  ‘Listen, it’s a sensitive time right now, we just had to witness a white man knock out a black man smooth out in front of all of America, and that’s why I asked that.’

“Paul:  ‘Stop playing with me, come on.’

“Hill:  ‘It’s a sensitive time right now.  We just had to witness a white man just knock a black man smooth out in front of all of America, so that’s why I asked that.’”

Paul attempted to take the interview in a more serious direction and explained how much preparation went into his fight. The young man also paid respect to his opponent.

“Paul:  ‘No, stop asking me that. I said no. It’s a s—ty question.  It’s a sport.’

“Champion:  ‘Why is it a s—ty question? Why is it a s—ty question?’

“Paul:  ‘How does this have anything to do with race? It doesn’t.’

“Champion:  ‘It’s a fine question. We’ve got to wake you up.’”

Nick Webb commented:

“Wow… If you would have told me that an interview done between Cari, Jemele and Jake Paul would result in Jake Paul being the smartest person in the conversation, I would’ve laughed at you. The joke is on me apparently. What an idiotic question.”

Whether Hill and Champion were joking is irrelevant, especially considering Hill’s past and her propensity for sparking racial and political dramas online — for example, calling President Donald Trump a “white supremacist” and those who voted for him “racist.”

Hill later was astounded that people didn’t realize she was joking.  Jemele Hill “joking” about racism when she’s called millions of people racists without basis or reason, simply isn’t allowed. She doesn’t deserve a pass on this. 

Paul won a bout with a seasoned athlete. Rather than be allowed to celebrate that, he and his victory were connected to racism, which is unfortunate.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First

Share:
Related Posts