Skip to comments.Bloomberg Hates Eric Holder's NYPD Federal Monitor, Calls It a "Terrible Idea"
Posted on 06/16/2013 11:46:41 AM PDT by nickcarraway
It comes as no surprise that controversy would ride the coattails of the news yesterday that Attorney General Eric Holder may suggest a federal monitor over the NYPD should stop-and-frisk be deemed unconstitutional in Floyd v. New York. Bloomberg and NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly freaked out in a teleconference with Holder the other day when they heard about the Justice Department's proposal. And yesterday, at an unrelated press conference, the m ayor made his opposition to the proposal absolutely, 100 percent clear. Contrary to an inspector general--a City Council proposal in the Community Safety Act currently making its way through the legislature--a federal monitor would act as a measure of checks and balances for the municipal law enforcement agency. It would ensure that the boys in blue were respecting federal guidelines of civil rights in the wake of stop-and-frisk and Muslim surveillance controversies while the IG would simply be a watchman over police action and behavior.
By doing so, Thomas Perez, the assistant attorney general for civil rights of this nature who first phoned City Hall about the plans, argued that the monitor would "[improve] public confidence, [make] officers' jobs safer, and [increase] the ability of the department to fight crime." Bloomberg doesn't think so.
"We think that a monitor would be even more disruptive than an IG," the mayor said. "It's just a terrible idea and it's not needed. ... It just makes no sense whatsoever, when lives are on the line, to try to change the rules and hamper the police department from doing their job." For justification, Bloomberg, as per usual in his defense, pointed to low crime rates as evidence that the NYPD was doing just fine without oversight.
Yes, of course, crime rates have dropped way below Giuliani levels and the city is way safer off than it was in 2001--with migrations into once-crime-ridden areas like Bed-Stuy and Crown Heights, it's hard to argue otherwise at this point. But that's not the issue here (and let's save the gentrification talk for another time).
The federal monitor isn't following statistics of success; it came from the last decade of controversy plaguing the NYPD. While crime has dropped tremendously, attention toward stop-and-frisk has increased to the point that the practice has found itself in federal court to determine whether or not the constitution allows for such a practice to exist in 2013. The specifically targeted surveillance of the Muslim community in a post-9/11 environment has also garnered lawsuits from the Justice Department based on its legality. And let us never forget the NYPD tapes exposed by fellow Voice scribe Graham Rayman.
So the focus here shouldn't be on track record, Mr. Mayor. To say "it just makes no sense whatsoever" disregards the notion that civil rights under Kelly's police force has seen a lot of shit over the past decade. People are questioning whether your seemingly unchecked police force is "phenomenally managed" and if its practices comply with the law, as you're "100 percent sure" they do. In a democracy, that discussion should be welcomed and, with a matter as important to our lives as law and order, encouraged.
Hey Dumbberg, we have this thing here called a constitution which as a bill of rights as its first ten amendments. There is a second amendment which you don’t seem to recognize; a fourth amendment about something as silly as reasonable search. There is no amendment about stipulating what one can eat or drink albeit you seem to think there is. If you don’t like it, run for mayor of Peking.
Probably the first time I’ve ever agreed with Bloomberg.
A Federal Monitor's only true purpose from this AG is to completely remake policing in the image of every nutjob ACLU community organizing fool.
They think that placing the palm of you hand on the back of a person as you politely tell them they have to leave a place of business is "using force."
The changes created by a federal monitor will create more crime...more violent crime....more victims...more dead citizens....and more dead and injured cops.
Feuding nannies, someone call ‘Nanny 911’! Need whaaambulance.
It’s good for Bloomie to get personal experience with a dicktater other than hisself.
so let me get this straight,...
Holder wants to bypass a state government and put federal “minders” at local mayorial levels
what could go wrong?
A “Federal Minder” to tell them who they should be arresting, and on what charges, based on NSA wiretapping info.
They want to federalize everything
May Bloomturd have waves of Federal nannies following Fed decoys around NY making sure New Yorkers don't consume excessive amounts of policing.
lol so we already have brownshirts and now we’ll have Commissars!
Look at Chicago where they don’t do stop and search.
Bloomie is like ‘Peanuts’ Lucy van Pelt and there’s room for only one fuss-budget boss-goose in NYC.
“Hey,” to paraphrase apologists for the NSA spying program, “As long as you have nothing to hide, why would you object to warrantless searches?”
Bloomberg spends his career stepping on other peoples toes. Now the admin steps on his toes and Ouch!!!
Guess bloomberg bristles at the notion that he’s not the Head Nanny in Charge. The irony is too sweet.
Here’s the deal...as long as the cops just randomly pick anyone and frisk....there’s no issue.
If you asked (if I were a cop)....I’d be frisking mostly all juveniles and people up to twenty-five years old, and mostly males. I’d be in trouble....but my statistics would show gun confiscation higher than the idiots were being random.
I don’t like this Minder business at all, it only leads to trouble and injustice. But I love anything that pisses Bloomberg (and the idiots who voted for him) off. So I’m torn.
Yep. A real random frisk sounds like a waste of time.
If asked if they are ‘profiling’ young, minority males with jeans hanging off their ...es and ‘tudes,
well, yeah, for the same reason Willie Sutton robbed banks: “Because that’s where the money is.”
That’s where the ‘evil’ guns are.