The get tough on crime cliches by political candidates are directed at police officers who need jobs. This stance is directed at city residents by elected officials who are unable to provide public safety within neighborhoods that are made unsafe. Neighborhoods that have reported criminal activity but a lack of cooperation from elected officials and polices in shutting down permissive crime such as drug operations in their neighborhoods.
Drugs provide lots of money for a city with low economic opportunities.
So, to appease fearful neighborhoods, candidates promise they will beef up staff.
Pay raises are promised to police officers to boost their morale in not being able to arrest criminals. The pay raise keeps the police officers mute on their ineffectiveness in impacting criminal activities. While those in crime ridden neighborhood have to fend for themselves against insurance companies and the permissible crime that is allowed to continue in their neighborhoods.
Residents options are either to leave the neighborhood or become criminals themselves. No one is coming in to save them from the criminal activity.
As long as elected officials feel safe in their home, they will point to other neighborhoods as being the source of the crime. When in fact, elected officials support crime to maintain their jobs. The tough on crime strategy is for more federal dollars to keep building the police force and maintain jobs for law enforcement. How often do you hear that our city is safe? But how many times have you heard a police officer is laid out from his job because of the reduction in crime? You don't? The men in blue are going to make sure they have jobs. How do you do that? You keep the criminals in circulation.
The real gangs are the cliques among elected officials. We saw one such clique recently. In the agreement that gave away over $25 million dollars of taxpayer money. Now presence in this deal were at least 5 or 6 police officers and no arrests were made..
No comments:
Post a Comment