Hmm: DOJ Accuses Democratic Party Run City Police Dept Of Civil Rights Violations

Why does it seem that this kind of stuff happens in Democratic Party run cities so often?

(Baltimore Sun) Baltimore police routinely violated the constitutional rights of residents by conducting unlawful stops and using excessive force, according to the findings of a long-anticipated Justice Department probe to be released Wednesday.

The practices overwhelmingly affected the city’s black residents in low-income neighborhoods, according to the 163-page report. In often scathing language, the report identified systemic problems and cited detailed examples.

The investigators found that “supervisors have issued explicitly discriminatory orders, such as directing a shift to arrest ‘all the black hoodies’ in a neighborhood.”

They also found that black residents were more likely to be stopped and searched as pedestrians and drivers even though police were more likely to find illegal guns, illicit drugs and other contraband on white residents.

I have to wonder: if blacks were being stopped much more often than whites, how do they know that whites were more likely to have “illegal guns, illicit drugs, and other contraband”? Maybe this

Black pedestrians were 37 percent more likely to be searched by Baltimore police citywide and 23 percent more likely to be searched during vehicle stops. But officers found contraband twice as often when searching white residents during vehicle stops and 50 percent more often during pedestrian stops, the report notes.

But, one has to wonder, was there a reason for searching blacks more than whites? In Baltimore, like many other Democratic Party run cities, blacks do account for a much heavier proportion of those who commit property and violent crimes. Almost every single murder committed in Baltimore this year was by a black person (where it is known) against another black person.

However, if you read the article, you will see that what should have been proper policing policies, stemming back to zero tolerance, went way, way, way overboard. In a Democratic Party run city. You can’t pin this on Republicans. Democrats only.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Hmm: DOJ Accuses Democratic Party Run City Police Dept Of Civil Rights Violations”

  1. Liam Thomas says:

    It really doesnt matter. The communist wing of the DNC is trying to start a civil war.

    Plain and simple…..a Civil war will give them all they need to finish the take over of this country while the GOP stands around with our fingers up our ass and the main stream MEDIA CHEERS THEM ON.

    turn out the lights.

  2. Dana says:

    Perhaps the white residents stopped and searched had more probable cause for the stops and searches. However, it has to be asked: why do the Democrats support taking away people’s Second Amendment rights, yet are so up in arms concerning people’s Fourth Amendment rights?

    Or is it only black people’s Fourth Amendment rights that worry them?

  3. Dana says:

    Let me ask a question which will make Jeffrey’s head explode: does being a young black male wearing a hoodie in Baltimore constitute probable cause all by itself?

  4. Dana says:

    Our esteemed host wrote:

    However, if you read the article, you will see that what should have been proper policing policies, stemming back to zero tolerance, went way, way, way overboard. In a Democratic Party run city. You can’t pin this on Republicans. Democrats only.

    But, but, but, it’s the Republicans who are the party of law and order, so it’s always their fault!

  5. john says:

    Well Dana the 4th Amendment like all of the others has limits. So should the 2nd. As an ‘originalist” what did “bear arms” mean to our Founding Fathers? Did it mean single shot rifles and muskets?
    Or did it mean quad mount 50 caliber weapon shttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TeRJsBfcpA

  6. john says:

    Soooo Teach you are saying that most members of the Baltimore Police Department are Democrats?
    and that alone is enough so that you despise them?
    Looks like another weak strawman argument FAIL

  7. Dana says:

    John wrote:

    Well Dana the 4th Amendment like all of the others has limits. So should the 2nd. As an ‘originalist” what did “bear arms” mean to our Founding Fathers? Did it mean single shot rifles and muskets?

    The Fourth Amendment has wiggle room:

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    The wiggle room is in the word ‘unreasonable,’ which allows for some interpretation, and the definition of ‘probable’ cause.

    The Second Amendment, as well as the First, leave no wiggle room at all. Just what part of “shall not be infringed” do you find so difficult to understand?

Pirate's Cove