Beware Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing Hunting Our Sheepdogs
Jun 8, 2021 08:37:21 #
Please read the topic and know the very substance it reveals. Beware of Wolves in Ships Clothing.
There is a bill in Washington DC called. “No Jump-Out Searches Act,”
This is very difficult for the law enforcement to implement. It is misleading and deceptive. Searches by police officers on drugs and unlawful possessions of firearms could be always interpreted in violation of this bill. It will end the police officers breaking the law and convicted . The drug dealers and law breakers will succeed and get more powerful. Eventually this country will be over powered and run by the drug cartels.
More police officers are resigning and retiring .
This is like the B*M tactics of ruling the country, along with the CRT, Woke, and Project 1619. They are rapidly changing the history aimed to take over.
===========================
Beware Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing Hunting Our Sheepdogs
Christopher C. Hull
CONTRIBUTOR
June 7, 2021 Updated: June 7, 2021
Commentary
The Bible teaches us to “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves” (Matthew 7:15). Today false prophets abound, clad in the sheepskin of racial justice, but seeking to devour our brave Men in Blue.
As anti-police animus sweeps the country, driven in part by the self-identified “trained Marxists” of the Black L***s M****r movement, more and more examples crop up of bills purporting to address law enforcement malfeasance that actually appear aimed at achieving law enforcement frailty.
For instance, on behalf of Americans for Intelligence Reform, I testified recently before the Washington, D.C. City Council Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety in a hearing to consider recommendations of the D.C. Police Reform Commission, and the bills supposedly associated with it.
What I actually found in the legislation shocked me.
One bill, for example, titled in part the “No Jump-Out Searches Act,” appears to have nothing whatsoever to do with jump-out searches.
Not that so-called jump-out searches are necessarily a problem in D.C. Supposedly, such searches involve police officers pulling up suddenly in unmarked vehicles to intercept a group of subjects without alerting them and conducting searches for weapons or drugs.
Of course, if the subjects were not suspects of weapons or drug law violations, such behavior would be deplorable. All Americans have a Second Amendment right to bear arms, for instance.
Yet as early as 2013, then-Metropolitan Police Department Chief Cathy Lanier called such claims “fantasy.” In 2015, MPD said it hasn’t used this policing tactic for at least 15 years, and even then, it was employed only for high-risk arrests. Lanier charged that activists were likely referring to vice units, responsible for covert drug busts. According to Chief Lanier, “An 11-year-old telling a story, and then the ACLU retelling that story, is not a fact.”
Moreover, even if MPD does engage in jump-out searches still, this bill appears to have no effect whatsoever on restricting such a practice. Instead, the plain text of the bill prohibits MPD from conducting searches of unoccupied vehicles unless an array of requirements are met.
What is the real concern here? It appears that the true goal of the legislation is to stop MPD from ever searching empty vehicles. And why? Because MPD might find contraband of one kind or another there.
Why would we not want MPD to find contraband?
In the case of drugs, it may be that some do not believe that drug possession should be illegal in the first place. Given that the number in Washington who died of drug overdoses rose from 213 in 2018, to 281 to 2019, to 349 in 2020—a nearly 40 percent increase over that time period—that seems like a terrible policy position. Regardless, it has literally nothing to do with jump-out policing.
In the case of firearms, it may be that some do not want individuals charged over concerns about mass incarceration. The problem with this in turn is that 2019 saw the highest homicide rate in the District in more than a decade, 2020 was worse, and homicides are up 35 percent in 2021 compared to this time last year. Apparently, D.C. policymakers want more gun control to restrict legal ownership, but don’t want to catch criminals with illegal firearms.
Finally, the bill explicitly states that the owner of the vehicle shall have the right to sue the individual officers not adhering to this law in their individual capacity. Such a policy would worsen the problem of police quitting. Last year, the D.C. Police Union President revealed that 70 percent of police officers in Washington were considering quitting. In fact, since the D.C. Council bill last year intended to reform District policing went into effect, at least 313 officers have retired or resigned.
Current D.C. Police Chief Robert Contee said that police officer attrition is a concern, noting that the MPD is “at an all-time low in terms of morale”: “Every year, we lose officers to resignation, retirement, termination… Certainly, we want to make sure that our officers who are out here doing the job that they are properly supported with the resources that they need.”
Yet this bill moves in the opposite direction, while at the same time directly harming public safety—all without a single mention of jump-out searches outside of the title.
Such anti-police, anti-policing bills are moving through city councils, state legislatures and Congress in alarming numbers.
Beware wolves in sheep’s clothing: Today, they’re hunting sheepdogs.
Christopher C. Hull, Ph.D., a Senior Fellow at Americans for Intelligence Reform, is President of Issue Management, Inc., a Washington, D.C.-based grassroots public affairs firm.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
There is a bill in Washington DC called. “No Jump-Out Searches Act,”
This is very difficult for the law enforcement to implement. It is misleading and deceptive. Searches by police officers on drugs and unlawful possessions of firearms could be always interpreted in violation of this bill. It will end the police officers breaking the law and convicted . The drug dealers and law breakers will succeed and get more powerful. Eventually this country will be over powered and run by the drug cartels.
More police officers are resigning and retiring .
This is like the B*M tactics of ruling the country, along with the CRT, Woke, and Project 1619. They are rapidly changing the history aimed to take over.
===========================
Beware Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing Hunting Our Sheepdogs
Christopher C. Hull
CONTRIBUTOR
June 7, 2021 Updated: June 7, 2021
Commentary
The Bible teaches us to “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves” (Matthew 7:15). Today false prophets abound, clad in the sheepskin of racial justice, but seeking to devour our brave Men in Blue.
As anti-police animus sweeps the country, driven in part by the self-identified “trained Marxists” of the Black L***s M****r movement, more and more examples crop up of bills purporting to address law enforcement malfeasance that actually appear aimed at achieving law enforcement frailty.
For instance, on behalf of Americans for Intelligence Reform, I testified recently before the Washington, D.C. City Council Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety in a hearing to consider recommendations of the D.C. Police Reform Commission, and the bills supposedly associated with it.
What I actually found in the legislation shocked me.
One bill, for example, titled in part the “No Jump-Out Searches Act,” appears to have nothing whatsoever to do with jump-out searches.
Not that so-called jump-out searches are necessarily a problem in D.C. Supposedly, such searches involve police officers pulling up suddenly in unmarked vehicles to intercept a group of subjects without alerting them and conducting searches for weapons or drugs.
Of course, if the subjects were not suspects of weapons or drug law violations, such behavior would be deplorable. All Americans have a Second Amendment right to bear arms, for instance.
Yet as early as 2013, then-Metropolitan Police Department Chief Cathy Lanier called such claims “fantasy.” In 2015, MPD said it hasn’t used this policing tactic for at least 15 years, and even then, it was employed only for high-risk arrests. Lanier charged that activists were likely referring to vice units, responsible for covert drug busts. According to Chief Lanier, “An 11-year-old telling a story, and then the ACLU retelling that story, is not a fact.”
Moreover, even if MPD does engage in jump-out searches still, this bill appears to have no effect whatsoever on restricting such a practice. Instead, the plain text of the bill prohibits MPD from conducting searches of unoccupied vehicles unless an array of requirements are met.
What is the real concern here? It appears that the true goal of the legislation is to stop MPD from ever searching empty vehicles. And why? Because MPD might find contraband of one kind or another there.
Why would we not want MPD to find contraband?
In the case of drugs, it may be that some do not believe that drug possession should be illegal in the first place. Given that the number in Washington who died of drug overdoses rose from 213 in 2018, to 281 to 2019, to 349 in 2020—a nearly 40 percent increase over that time period—that seems like a terrible policy position. Regardless, it has literally nothing to do with jump-out policing.
In the case of firearms, it may be that some do not want individuals charged over concerns about mass incarceration. The problem with this in turn is that 2019 saw the highest homicide rate in the District in more than a decade, 2020 was worse, and homicides are up 35 percent in 2021 compared to this time last year. Apparently, D.C. policymakers want more gun control to restrict legal ownership, but don’t want to catch criminals with illegal firearms.
Finally, the bill explicitly states that the owner of the vehicle shall have the right to sue the individual officers not adhering to this law in their individual capacity. Such a policy would worsen the problem of police quitting. Last year, the D.C. Police Union President revealed that 70 percent of police officers in Washington were considering quitting. In fact, since the D.C. Council bill last year intended to reform District policing went into effect, at least 313 officers have retired or resigned.
Current D.C. Police Chief Robert Contee said that police officer attrition is a concern, noting that the MPD is “at an all-time low in terms of morale”: “Every year, we lose officers to resignation, retirement, termination… Certainly, we want to make sure that our officers who are out here doing the job that they are properly supported with the resources that they need.”
Yet this bill moves in the opposite direction, while at the same time directly harming public safety—all without a single mention of jump-out searches outside of the title.
Such anti-police, anti-policing bills are moving through city councils, state legislatures and Congress in alarming numbers.
Beware wolves in sheep’s clothing: Today, they’re hunting sheepdogs.
Christopher C. Hull, Ph.D., a Senior Fellow at Americans for Intelligence Reform, is President of Issue Management, Inc., a Washington, D.C.-based grassroots public affairs firm.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Jun 8, 2021 10:59:12 #
Radiance3 wrote:
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Even your Epoch Times disagrees.
Jun 8, 2021 11:04:15 #
kemmer wrote:
Even your Epoch Times disagrees.
==================
Cause your liberal brain don't understand ethics in writing.
Ethical protocol, you don't claim writings of others as your own. Epoch Times does that to all commentaries. Must be applied by anybody who has the integrity.
Jun 9, 2021 00:43:30 #
Radiance3 wrote:
==================
Cause your liberal brain don't understand ethics in writing.
Ethical protocol, you don't claim writings of others as your own. Epoch Times does that to all commentaries. Must be applied by anybody who has the integrity.
Cause your liberal brain don't understand ethics in writing.
Ethical protocol, you don't claim writings of others as your own. Epoch Times does that to all commentaries. Must be applied by anybody who has the integrity.
When legit newspapers publish an op-ed, they never stoop to noting at the bottom that the stated opinion isn't necessarily theirs.
Jun 10, 2021 04:31:45 #
kemmer wrote:
When legit newspapers publish an op-ed, they never stoop to noting at the bottom that the stated opinion isn't necessarily theirs.
That's because the legit newspapers are all owned by the same people and everyone knows their opinions are worthless.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.