Please Direct Me To The Fainting Couch

News reports emerged last week that a mural depicting the face of George Floyd in my hometown of Milwaukee, Wisconsin was damaged when someone poured gray paint over his face. This story was picked up by other ABC affiliates in different cities across the country including a TV station in Dayton Ohio. Why would anybody in Dayton give a flying you-know-what about this?

Let me unpack this for you. First of all my initial reaction upon hearing this was one of, give me a break, who cares? I, for one, do not. Most readers of my column know my sentiments about Saint George. Yes, he has been elevated to sainthood by liberals, Democrat politicians and most factions of the black community. Why, is beyond me. For liberals and Democrat politicians it is nothing more than moral preening and virtue signaling about racial sensitivity. For the black community it is about the lack of more legitimate role models to exalt and because he has been made into a hero and cause celebre by the pathetic corporate media and black racialists who are exploiting his death for financial and political gain. People like Black Lives Matter founder Patrisse Cullors and the white guy who posed as black for decades, Shawn King. He was another big mouth Black Lives Matter activist getting face time in the media after the deaths of Mike Brown in Ferguson, Missouri and after the death of George Floyd until it was discovered that he was born to two white parents. In fact, it was they who exposed this phony as a fraud. But he was given a pass because his intentions were pure, we are told. Cullors stepped down from the BLM movement but not before taking millions from the BLM fundraising PAC for herself and her family members and recently bought several million-dollar properties for herself. This includes purchasing a million-dollar property in Canada of all places. I was not aware that Canada was a hotbed of BLM activity. She also admitted to using her $6 million property in an exclusive gated community in California for hosting parties. Survivors of Mike Brown, Freddy Gray, Eric Garner and Floyd were not on the invite list. Shawn King, on the other hand, used $40,000 of donated PAC funds to purchase a show dog that he said he needed for protection. I guess the local dog shelter was out of suitable candidates. King, after all, wasn’t going to have a mutt protecting him.

Many cities across the country erected statues and memorials for George Floyd. This is the same criminal creep who did time in prison for a home invasion robbery looking for drugs. During the incident he held a loaded gun to the stomach of a pregnant female threatening to shoot her. Yes, that George Floyd. The same guy who was geeked up on a fatal amount of an illegal narcotic and was trying to pass a counterfeit bill at a store to purchase more drugs when he resisted arrest. No self-respecting city should have erected statues, painted murals or set up memorials for this miscreant.

I want to be clear. I do not advocate for acts of vandalism. The destruction of another’s property is a crime and should be adequately punished. Let’s, however, take a look at other acts of vandalism that have not gotten the same media coverage that those involving Floyd statues, murals and memorials. And I might add incidents that are more newsworthy.

America went through a period when anarchists and BLM apologists declared jihad on America and began destroying symbols of the founding of this country by destroying statues of our founders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and American Revolutionary War and Civil War generals and did so with impunity. Basically, the liberal corporate media shrugged their shoulders in reporting it. The attention to it lasted a day or so. Democrat politicians demonstrated tacit approval by their silence. Some even called it democracy in action.

Another comparison in lack of news coverage on vandalism incidents compared to those involving George Floyd is in the area of police precincts and cruisers that have been vandalized. Not much fanfare occurred after these incidents. Here are a few examples. Protestors carrying BLM signs vandalized a California police station in January of 2021. In Davis, California, a police station was spray painted with anti-police sentiments. In Philadelphia, a number of vandalism incidents occurred at a station including damage to three vehicles. In Little Rock, Arkansas, multiple police stations were vandalized. Worse yet, a Little Rock fallen officers memorial wall was vandalized. Spray painted across the memorials was Defund The Police. A San Diego police station reported that for the second time in a week vandals target the station, smashing windows. The personal vehicles of four police officers were targeted and vandalized. A White Oak, Maryland, police station was vandalized when someone shot through and shattered a window of the building. I could list numerous other incidents, but you get my point. And I am not trying to suggest that these are breaking national news stories. For the most part, they are local news stories. Nothing more. Vandalism to George Floyd memorials, however, seem to go beyond local reporting and I am simply asking why? Several major news outlets made a big deal in reporting when a Floyd mural was struck by lightning and destroyed. Really? Who cares? We know why these were reported. Part of it is to stir up racial animus by liberal media. It’s insinuating some racist component where none exists. And why does vandalism to Floyd memorials draw the interest of the FBI but no interest when police stations are attacked? Memo to the FBI: How about a little help finding the perpetrators of attacks against police buildings with the same fervor you do in going after the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers or moms attending school board meetings?

And there is this last lack of vandalism media coverage. Are you aware that there have been over 165 reports of vandalism incidents by pro-abortion activists against pro-life pregnancy centers and churches since the Supreme Court issued the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v Wade on abortion? The interesting thing here is that the perpetrators in these incidents do not hide who they are, often leaving their signature calling card. A group calling itself Jane’s Revenge claims responsibility in many of these attacks. Not a single member of this group has been identified or arrested. The FBI has no trouble identifying members of the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers or the January 6 group who breached the U.S. Capitol, but can’t seem to identify members of Jane’s Revenge? Really? The truth is that they are not motivated enough to find out, just like with attacks on local police agencies. That is disgraceful.

Some criminal acts rise above simple state misdemeanor vandalism. Attacks against government institutions and Supreme Court decisions are acts of domestic terrorism and demand federal investigation and prosecution. Vandalism to George Floyd memorials, however wrong, are not acts of domestic terror. It is time to stop giving them that recognition.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of AmericasSheriff LLC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Mystery Abounds: The Lunar Effect

There has always been a perception among cops, firefighters and emergency room personnel that there’s more and often stranger crime that occurs on the night of a full moon. Many in the police community have linked specific moons to a rise in aggressive behavior. This belief is so strong that the International Association of Chiefs of Police spent money to commission a study in the late 1970s to find out if there is any scientific evidence to support this belief. They found nothing definitive. If you check with the Department of Justice, you’ll find a half-dozen or so more studies that also point to no precise scientific explanation.

 However, based upon my own non-scientific observations as a police officer, I found that assertions that citizens fight each other on the nights of a full moon and fight the police with greater frequency on nights of a new moon are beliefs with merit. I also found that when the new or full moon fell particularly on any given Friday that this phenomena appeared to be fueled even further.

 While anecdotal evidence points to a connection between the moon and aggression, studies on the topic have often fallen short of being conclusive. Looking into the potential of various aspects of the moon phases and how they affect our bodies and minds, the jury is still out among the scientific community on how or even whether a full moon really makes a difference.

 Miami psychiatrist Arnold Leiber in his book The Lunar Effect proposed that the moon was linked to human behavior by adversely affecting mental and emotional abilities by raising physiologically disruptive ”biological tides” in the body akin to the tides it raises in the earth’s ocean. Other studies have concluded that any increased percentage of aggressive behaviors, crimes and suicides on full moon days may, in fact, be due to “human tidal waves” caused by the gravitational pull of the moon. In some circles, these theories have become a somewhat commonly accepted reasoning on how the mind and body may be physiologically affected by lunar phases.

 The question then remains: Does a full moon contribute to an increase in crime?

 The University of Washington did a study all the way back in 1978 concluding that out of 11,613 cases of aggravated assault in a five-year period, assaults occurred more often around the full moon, and 34,318 crimes in a yearlong period also showed that crimes occurred more frequently during the full moon. Falling short of conclusive evidence of the moon’s influence, this simply added some data for consideration.

 If it’s possible that the lunar cycle affects some people’s behavior, this fact then has implications for the court system. The “full moon” has even been a defense in criminal cases. According to Psychology Today, in 19th century England, lawyers used the defense of “guilty by reason of the full moon” to make the claim that their “lunatic” clients were not accountable for their actions under the moon’s influence, thereby creating what became known as the “Lunar Defense.”

 Cops continue to point to the lunar effect to explain moonlight madness, speculating further that perhaps the moon’s gravitational influence can bring about changes in people who may already suffer from some form of a mental imbalance.

A study done by the University of New Orleans confirmed that cops were among the strongest believers that more crime and trauma occurred on nights when the moon was full. Some suspect the phenomenon is a self-fulfilling prophecy reasoning that law enforcement officers are by nature adrenaline junkies and that the full moon gives officers a reason to investigate things they might usually ignore, thereby explaining any increase in activity. Speculating officers are looking for the evidence that confirms their belief.

So, if you want to determine the relationship between lunar phases, aggression and crime, you’ll just have to look to the high volumes of anecdotal evidence from policemen, firefighters and other first responders along with hospital doctors and nurses from around the world while adding your own experiences to the stories to be told.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine Managing Editor, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

How You Can Tell It’s Election Season

As voters head into the November midterm elections, crime is one of the leading issues on their minds. Unprecedented levels of violence and disorder in urban areas mainly controlled by Democrat politicians have these voters nervous. I bring up Democrats because for nearly the last decade, it was high-profile Democrat politicians like Maxine Waters, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, Ilan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley and Cora Bush who have led the charge in cop hatred and cop bashing. Even Joe Biden stood silently by. His silence was tacit approval. It was this cabal that led the chorus in calls for defunding the police and even abolishing the police, and it has had an impact.

Numerous law enforcement agencies have had their budgets slashed considerably. The LAPD, NYPD, Milwaukee, St. Louis and Chicago Police Departments all suffered millions, tens of millions and in the case of NYPD, a billion dollars in budget reductions, leading to personnel cuts. There is an indisputable correlation that the constant political bashing by these politicians has led to record-setting rises in violent crime in areas that they represent. In other words, the areas that rely on effective policing the most are suffering the most in terms of victimization. Poor people end up being a byproduct of this defunding movement. These are the people these same liberal Democrat elite politicians claim to represent. Really? If that is their version of compassion, then no thanks. They can keep it.

In Milwaukee and Chicago, children struck and killed by gunfire is up precipitously. Auto thefts in Milwaukee are at record levels. To a middle-class family, having their car stolen is not just a nonviolent property crime, it’s a big deal. They often don’t have a second car nor do their insurance policies include a replacement car until theirs is located and returned. A middle-class family’s car is used to take their kids to school, go to a doctor appointment and to the grocery store. Elites like those politicians previously mentioned don’t have to worry about their car being stolen. It’s no big deal, they arrogantly conclude.

Recently Democrat U.S. Rep. Cora Bush was driving in a car in Washington D.C., another area ravaged by violence, and it was struck by gunfire from an errant bullet. She freaked out, saying, “Any act of gun violence shakes your soul”. Oh really, Cori? This is the same woman who called for defunding the St. Louis Police Department, an area she represents. The St. Louis Police Department budget has been cut by $4 million, leading to the elimination of 98 police positions. She went on a CNN program and said she absolutely supports defunding police all the while spending a reported $70,000 for additional private security. When confronted about the expenditure on private security, she asked, “You would rather I die”? She went on to say that, “I have private security because my body is worth being on this planet.” Yes, folks, this is the arrogance of a Democrat elitist. Safety and security for me but not for thee.

People in these crime-ravaged communities endure this kind of random violence on a daily basis. In Milwaukee recently a 12-year-old girl was struck by a bullet in the chest and killed as she helped her mother unload groceries from their car. It was reported that her mother had previously complained to police about stolen cars in their neighborhood. Businesses in Milwaukee are beginning to complain that the crime, violence and disorder are making to hard for them to attract customers. That affects their bottom line. Customers are not going to frequent areas where crime is out of control. And another thing. These businesses employ people, so jobs are lost if they close or move.

So here is my point in setting this background. Most of these same cop-hating Democrat politicians are trying to make voters believe that they never supported defunding the police. I kid you not. They are hoping that voters are either stupid enough to believe them or will have a case of amnesia as they go to the polls to vote. One poll I saw said that 67% of voters going to the polls say that out-of-control crime is the top issue for them. In other words, crime is on the ballot. That is why Democrats are scrambling. They know it’s judgment day. A candidate for the U.S. Senate in Wisconsin, Mandela Barnes, who when in the state legislature supported defunding the police, now says that saying he did is a lie. Unfortunately for him, there is video and audio tape of him saying this. He still maintains he does not support defunding police. Yes, he does. What he means is now that it affects his statewide electability, he wants a do-over.

Here is my message to all these defund the police Democrats seeking election or re-election: You own this. You meant it. It worked. You are not running away from this. I won’t let you. There is ample evidence available of you supporting defunding efforts. All someone has to do is put your name and the words defund the police in a search engine and it populates with major news stories of you saying it. You need to be made to drag this around up to Election Day hung like an albatross around your neck. The Black candidates will try playing the race card to get me to take back what I just said because I referenced “hung around your neck”. Problem is that I am Black, and that dog won’t hunt this time. Not here anyway. It’s our turn now.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

BLUE UNITY NIGHT: A Rousing Success!

By: Joel Gordon

The BLUE Magazine and Moment of Silence once again provided for an incredible night in strong recognition of national law enforcement unity just as BLUE Magazine publisher and Moment of Silence founder and Vice President Daniel Del Valle intended. Despite Hurricane Ian, the “Sunshine State” didn't disappoint. On the heels of a nearly cloudless day of sunshine, followed by a clear night, nearly 400 Blue Unity Night attendees converged upon the Signature Grand in Davie, Florida on Sept. 30, 2022, to assemble en masse for an hour of mingling with new and old friends. For starters, the Police Pipe and Drum of Florida along with the Davie Police Department Honor Guard officially kicked off the night of recognition and festivities. And 15-year-old Alyssa Del Valle beautifully sang our national anthem. Master of Ceremonies and BLUE Magazine mentor former NYPD Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik commanded the microphone to introduce our multiple worthy Valor Award recipients who received their honors to much-deserved resounding applause and ovations.

· Claudia Apolinar - Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department

· Emmanuel Perez-Perez - Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department

· Jacob Albarado - Border Patrol Agent, Texas

· Raffaello Cervera – Doral, Florida, Police Department

· Johnny Beautelus – Doral, Florida, Police Department

· Daniel Vilarchao – Doral, Florida, Police Department

Multiple presenters, including BLUE Magazine Editor-In-Chief George Beck, then went on to present the magazine's prestigious Senior Journalist Award earned by BLUE Magazine columnist Kirk Lawless. Law enforcement Leadership and Advocacy recognition awards were also presented:

· Chief Gustavo Medina -Tequesta, Florida, Police Department

· Pastor Paul Beresford – Tequesta, Florida, Police Department

· Joseph Occhipinti – National Police Defense Foundation

· Officer Frank Voce – New York City Police Department

· Chief Joel Gordon – BLUE Magazine Managing Editor

A fantastic meal was served followed by words of wisdom and encouragement that were given by special guests: former ICE Director Tom Homan, Retired Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke and former Maricopa Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Musical entertainment then commenced with a lively dance floor and much enjoyment. It was an event for the ages! Thank you to all of our colleagues, writers, editors, officials and law enforcement advocates without whom our efforts would not be possible. Thank you too for the incredible work done by all on staff who were also recognized for working tirelessly to make this event a true success. As the wristbands given to event attendees said #blueunitynight ... STAY IN THE FIGHT!

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine Managing Editor, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Utah Sheriffs Executive Board Castrated By Cop Haters

There is a reason that the thin blue line is a symbol for law enforcement. It represents the separation of good versus evil and it is the American police officer that stands in between those two forces to protect the good and fight the evil. The line is thin because there aren’t many of us. It is why we need to have each other’s backs when under attack. Street cops understand this better than anybody.

This profession has been under constant attack ever since Officer Darren Wilson was assaulted by a career criminal named Mike Brown who tried to disarm the officer. This local incident went viral and became the symbol for cop haters all across America under the lie of Hands Up, Don’t Shoot. From that incident forward, this profession that I had been a part of for nearly 40 years has been smeared, lied about, wrongly indicted, suffered deadly ambush attacks, spit on and had rocks and urine filled balloons thrown at them during riots. Calls began from these miscreants to abolish police and defund them. I waited impatiently for someone in a law enforcement executive position to defend the men and women who go out everyday to do the best they can under sometimes impossible conditions to serve and protect their community. When no law enforcement executive stepped up, I decided to. I knew the perils associated with pushing back against this evil force but I had to. I put my own safety and well being aside because I as the top cop in Milwaukee County, sent front line deputies into harms way everyday on a tour of duty. I wanted them to know that if they got into a situation that went to crap through no fault of their own, I would have their back publicly and politically. I don’t expect perfection from them. I do however expect excellence.

Sadly, I didn’t get much help from my fellow police chiefs or sheriffs. I was a man alone but I didn’t care. I found myself in the crosshairs of the cop haters from groups like Black Lives Matter, the NAACP and other nefarious groups using liberal media outlets as the vehicle to attack me. I didn’t flinch.

Ever since I retired, I have stayed with my mission to defend the courage, sacrifice, the integrity, professionalism and the commitment of the men and women in uniform serving their communities. I travel all across their great country speaking to front line law enforcement groups trying to strengthen their resolve and commitment at a time when people are leaving the profession in record numbers. I saw a beleaguered bunch from department to department. I could feel it. I reminded them that but for them, their communities would disintegrate into chaos. Just look at the rising crime, violence and disorder that has a stranglehold on many cities and towns. What many officers tell me is that they don’t have the the support of their law enforcement executives. My support for them has been full throated, unambiguous and unapologetic. Officers know it and thank me for it. I am proud to do it.

The attacks against me continue to this day. Several incidents however cause me to call out the betrayal, the cowardice and caving to the very entities that hate us. You cannot appease Black Lives Matter, the NAACP or Antifa. When you give in to them, they demand more. I saw this happen as some law enforcement executives either sat silent or absorbed the unwarranted criticism of police agencies. I saw a picture of a police chief of a California Police Department marching in a protest holding a sign that read Black Lives Matter. I was disgusted. Abject pandering. Many others got on board in calls for police reform that weaken officers ability to effectively perform their duties and keep them safe.

That brings me to the title of this piece. I want to make it clear that I am not accusing every member in the Utah Sheriff’s Association of what I am about to say. I was invited as the keynote speaker to address the Utah Sheriffs Association conference in St. George Utah. We had a signed contract. The local newspaper took notice and started fanning the flames to have me cancelled. I know how this works. A local liberal media outlet contacts a cop hating group and uses them as a catalyst to start a firestorm by asking them if they have a comment on my attending the conference to speak. The Salt Lake City Tribune then wrote a column blasting the Sheriffs Association for inviting me. They called me controversial and divisive. It’s all boiler plate language used by the leftist media whenever they write about me. They bring up that I refer to BLM as Black LIES Matter and that I call them a hate group. The news story said that in 2015, I called the NAACP nothing more than a political propaganda entity for the left. All of that is true. I have said that and believe that to be the case to this day. I say what I mean and I mean what I say. The news article pointed out that the NAACP state chapter in Utah president Jeanette Williams, told the reporter that she spoke with the sheriff’s association by phone and sent emails to them saying that bringing in David Clarke was the wrong thing to do”. She said she, “was able to have Clarke’s appearance cancelled”. Williams told the reporter that she, “was worried that having a speaker promote views like those held by Clarke to Utah’s law enforcement would damage the collaborative environment she has worked to creat to foster better policing in Utah. Williams said she was appreciative that the sheriffs listened to her concerns. Funny that Williams won’t listen to any of my views. The Utah Sheriff’s Association made a deal with the devil. But they didn’t listen to their membership.

Let me stop there for a minute. The Utah state chapter of the NAACP? Seriously. Let’s do some math here. Utah has a black population of 1.2% out of a total population of nearly 3.3 million people. Even the Asian population is higher and stands at 2.3%. Why is there even a need for the NAACP to have a state chapter in Utah? What do they do? Here are some interesting points about the NAACP. They support abortion knowing that abortion kills more black babies than any other demographic. They oppose school choice even though it is black kids who are trapped in failing K-12 public schools ruining any chance at success in life. They also support defunding police efforts which would harm black communities who need policing the most. The NAACP opposes voter ID laws. Black people when polled support voter ID by about 70%. The NAACP is disconnected from black America. Everything they support is on the Democrat Party agenda. It is why I call the NAACP the propaganda wing of the liberal policy agenda. They are sell-outs. And they claim that former Sheriff David Clarke’s appearance to address the law enforcement officers and executives would be harmful? Really?

The news story goes on the say that neither Cache County Sheriff Chad Jensen, president of the association, nor its executive director Scott Burns, responded to a request for comment. Cowards. The people of Utah and their law enforcement officers deserve to know why they caved, why they folded like a cheap suit, why they didn’t have the intestinal fortitude to stand their ground against the cop hating NAACP. With an opportunity to demonstrate leadership to the rank and file law enforcement officers, they genuflected and prostrated themselves to the demands of a cop hating group. Disgraceful. Total capitulation. How can the executive board of the Utah Sheriff’s Association say that they support the Constitution’s First Amendment free speech aspect by not allowing someone with an opposing view contrary to the Salt Lake City Tribune newspaper writer or the head of the state NAACP to come speak? Opposing views matter. Opposing views are healthy in a constitutional democracy and should be welcome in a free society such a our’s. It is important for me to point out that not all members of the association agree with the decision of their executive board. I received an email from one of the members who wrote, “Many of us attending this conference are thoroughly disgusted with the decision to cancel your appearance. Many of us do not support this decision, one that cancels free speech which is never appropriate and should never be tolerated, but especially because it is based solely on a disapproval of views. We are embarrassed about how you have been treated and wish you the best of luck. God help us if this is to be the future of this country”.

Now that is how you have someone’s back, especially a fellow law enforcement colleague. I feel bad for the officers still serving with this lack of leadership. Let me be clear that I will never stop on my mission to help law enforcement officers. I will use whatever platforms I have to accomplish this. I easily could have move on and enjoyed my retirement but I cannot leave those still serving behind to endure the nonstop cop bashing.

Memo to the president and executive director and of the Utah Sheriff’s Association: You didn’t have my back when you should have. Like the email I received from one of your members said. You should be ashamed. I’ll add, how do you sleep at night? Your front line officers needed you to stare down the NAACP. You blinked instead.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

UVALDE: LEADERSHIP, COMMON SENSE & COURAGE

By: Joel E. Gordon

If Uvalde teaches us anything, it should be that Law Enforcement leaders should be chosen based on their skill set, experience, and leadership abilities during crisis. Not political connections, tenure, or demographics. Agendas need to be apolitical when the shit hits the fan. - Rob O'Donnell via Twitter

The Uvalde, Texas, School District Police Department has received much criticism for its failure to expeditiously stop a school gunman who shot and killed 19 children and two teachers. Texas Department of Public Safety Director Col. Steven McCraw called the response "100% flawed." When speaking to the state's Senate committee, he heavily condemned the response by police. He also said that officers on-scene could have stopped the gunman’s rampage within "three minutes." 'The officers had weapons ... [they] had body armor. The children had none…' “response to the Uvalde shooting was an ‘abject failure,’ as the on-scene commander waited for things like a key “that was never needed.”

Thor Eells, executive director of the National Tactical Officers Association, said, "If you're in a classroom with innocent victims and I know that shots have been fired, I need to engage you.”

“They had the tools,” said Terry Nichols, a former Seguin police chief and active-shooter expert. “Tactically, there’s lots of different ways you could tackle this. … But it takes someone in charge, in front, making and executing decisions and that simply did not happen.”

While investigations are ongoing as to the facts and what could have been done differently at this active shooter scene one thing is certain; moral and procedural obligations and a legal obligation to protect are not one and the same. Criminal charges against police officers who fail to protect the public are rare.

The motto, "To Protect and Serve," was first used by the Los Angeles Police Department in the 1950s and it has been copied by many other police departments and is engrained in the minds of the public. However, what is a police officer's legal obligation to actually protect people? Must sworn law enforcement officers risk their lives in dangerous situations like the one in Uvalde?

The answer is no.

· In a 1981 case Warren v. District of Columbia, the D.C. Court of Appeals held that police have a general "public duty," but that "no specific legal duty exists" unless there is a special relationship between an officer and an individual, such as a person in custody.

· In 2005's Castle Rock v. Gonzales, a woman sued the police for failing to protect her from her husband after he violated a restraining order and abducted and killed their three children. Justices said the police had no such duty.

· Most recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit upheld a lower court ruling that police could not be held liable for failing to protect students in the 2018 shooting that claimed 17 lives at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

Police do have protocols for dealing with dangerous situations like the ones in Uvalde and Parkland, and these protocols often emphasize the need for police to take rapid action. The International Association of Chiefs of Police says, "Taking action during active shooter incidents, rather than waiting for specially equipped and trained officers, can save lives and prevent serious injuries. Time lost by delayed action is likely to result in additional casualties."

IACP provides guidance on how officers in those situations should assess how to proceed with that rapid response.

And no matter how it is accomplished, it will likely be extremely dangerous and be a risk to officers own lives. But as courts have determined, they have no obligation to do that.

As after-action reviews continue in Uvalde and elsewhere, without any rush to judgment, it is important to note that most officers who I have known and worked with have a strong desire to help protect those in need. Both I and other officers I have known have gone out of our way to resolve threats, avoiding the use of deadly force when possible, often at risk to our own safety.

Preparedness and a balance between officer safety and other necessary actions against attackers to save lives must be achieved. That being said, in an active shooter or in-progress attack situation time is not always on the side of those wanting to protect and deadly force can become necessary to stop a threat to innocent lives which is why training and preparedness is essential now and always. Leadership, common sense and courage must prevail.

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Crime And Violence Won’t Abate On Their Own

Liberal politicians, their failed urban policies and their accomplices in the media are getting nervous heading into this November’s midterm elections over what impact the surge in crime, violence and disorder will have on their electoral prospects. This will be a great opportunity for voters to express their anger over what is happening on their streets and in their neighborhoods as large swaths of public spaces are under the control of the criminal element. This has happened because Democrat politicians in cities like Chicago. Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, St. Louis and Memphis, just to name a few, literally and intentionally collapsed the criminal justice infrastructure.

The criminal justice infrastructure, as you know, has four main components: police on the front end, prosecutors and courts in the middle and corrections on the end. All four of these components must be functioning together or it won’t work. It doesn’t matter how many people law enforcement officers arrest if most of them escape prosecution. It doesn’t matter how many criminals are charged or indicted if some judge hands down a lenient sentence upon conviction. Example. In Milwaukee recently a 47-year-old man pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl. Upon entering the guilty plea, the prosecutor asked the judge to remand the suspect into custody due to the seriousness of the crime. The judge went against that recommendation and released the now-convicted rapist on a low bail at the request of the defense attorney, “so he could get his affairs in order” before sentencing. That creep a week later went to the home of his ex-girlfriend and strangled her to death in front of her children. See what I mean when I say that if just one part of the system fails, the whole system collapses?

The police are not immune from failing in their responsibility and role, either. Recently, the Milwaukee Police Department announced a policy directive to officers to no longer arrest people on most misdemeanor warrants. They have been directed to issue them a notice to appear voluntarily for a court date. That is anathema to the broken windows theory of policing in addition to going against the laws of human behavior. Just about every person with a warrant out for their arrest knows about the existence of the warrant and did nothing about it. Now that they have been given a piece of paper to appear, who thinks this person will now become an upstanding citizen and appear voluntarily in court on the warrant? In fact, the opposite will happen. Police have sent a signal that they don’t take the warrant that seriously, either. Oh, and another thing: A warrant is a court order that commands a law enforcement officer to take the person named into custody and bring them before a judge. How does an officer get away with violating that court order? This is a slippery slope, folks. Today, it’s not arresting on misdemeanor warrants, tomorrow, it’s not arresting on low-level felony warrants. And another thing: What liability does an agency and city face if an officer has stopped someone who has an active warrant and they subsequently let the perpetrator go and later he or she goes on to commit a serious felony? They had a legal means to get that person off the street, even albeit temporarily, depending on the disposition of the warrant and they did not do so. Not to mention that a thorough debriefing of the arrestee should be conducted as well to determine what other criminal activity they might be involved in or learning information about their associates. This intelligence can be shared with front-line street officers and others investigating unsolved crimes. Most people with outstanding warrants have extensive criminal involvement.

And now a new variable of criminal perpetrators is emerging. Studies are showing that more and more younger people, meaning teenagers as young as 12 and 13 are committing more violent crimes like shootings, carjackings and robberies. That can be interpreted to mean that the next generation of criminals will be coming into adulthood having had an earlier start in criminal behavior and with a more

experienced violent past embedded into their DNA. There are a number of reasons for this younger demographic turning to criminal behavior.

The juvenile justice system is antiquated. Its main goal focuses on rehabilitation, not punishment. In Wisconsin, the major objective of the juvenile justice system is to preserve the family unit by keeping the child in the dysfunctional family when there is no stability or responsible adult in charge. That model was appropriate 25 or more years ago when teens were mainly engaged in nuisance-type behavior like truancy and shoplifting, not the serious crime we see today. Society back then had more intact families, more involved parents, a successful K-12 public education system that actually educated students giving them a solid base going into adulthood and more options than criminal behavior to choose from. Consider today’s urban pathologies like absent fathers, failing schools, questionable lifestyle choices like kids turning to gangs and drugs and you have a volatile mix for the increase of criminal involvement by youths.

This next generation will also enter the adult criminal justice system with the benefit of more lax and lenient attitude. Here is what needs to happen: First, we need to stop with the naïve view that all of these career criminals can be reformed. They can’t. For many, the behavior has become deeply ingrained. It’s a lifestyle. Second, punishment needs to return to its rightful role in corrections. Too much of an emphasis on rehabilitation sends a message that society will not adequately punish criminals for their unwanted behavior. Second chance programs can occur after a period of meaningful incarceration, not before.

It should be evident to any politician and policy maker that the system is blinking red. Crime can be reduced with policy changes. Those effective changes were already in place during the historic record lows in violent and property crimes all across the country beginning in 1990 through the first decade of 2000. We got serious about reducing crime by holding lawbreakers accountable. All four parts of the criminal justice system were working in concert with each other. Police embarked on a strategy of quality of life enforcement. When arrests happened, they led to actual prosecution with bail used to keep the offenders off the streets. Today we have cities that have enacted no-bail policies even for serious crimes and prosecutors reluctant to charge criminals with those crimes. Previously, courts actually sentenced repeat offenders to longer periods of incarceration. Today, we have an over reliance on probation and parole that returns repeat offenders back onto the streets.

We need to stop letting pro-criminal groups influence public policy. They have created an environment that allows crime, violence and disorder to thrive. This has had a devastating negative impact on public life in America. Let’s end the needless death and destruction of American society.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Perhaps it’s Time to “Re-Imagine” the FBI?

By: Joel E. Gordon

With all of the accusations of a two-tiered system of justice due to actions and inactions by the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation, the time seems right for a thorough review of these agencies. Even Rochelle Walensky, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) director, admits that there have been MAJOR COVID-19 MISTAKES and has announced plans to restructure her agency although calling it simply a “Reset.” Why shouldn’t the FBI and DOJ admit to errors as well?

The recent raid of President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence has revealed some interesting oversights with the apparent failure to follow advance independent Taint Team protocols to review documents so that improper seizure in violation of legally privileged communications, such as attorney-client privilege, or other document seizure overreach is disallowed (such as unauthorized passport seizure). The DOJ uses Taint Teams to review potentially privileged material and determine what may be shared with the team investigating or prosecuting a case, and what must be withheld as privileged. In the absence of this filtering process, if prosecutors improperly review privileged communications, that exposure may taint the entire investigation and make prosecutions difficult or even impossible.

The formerly super careful agents at DOJ and FBI — the kind who dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s — apparently couldn’t even be bothered to proofread the name of the home of the president they were planning to raid.

Is this an example of inadequate oversight, corruption and/or acts of incompetence? Reports of FBI requests that video surveillance of the raid activity be shut down, when normal law enforcement transparency policies typically encourage use of cameras, including law enforcement body-worn cameras to remain on, leads to questions of impropriety. At the very least, I find the apparent lack of judgment and intellect on the federal level to be truly astonishing.

The partially unsealed affidavit in application for the Mar-a-Lago search warrant includes part of a letter a Justice Department official sent to Trump's council after that June visit, requesting that the storage room where documents in question were stored be secured.

The letter, part of which is redacted, explains that because “Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information,” the classified documents that have been held there since Trump left the White House in January 2021 “have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.”

“Accordingly,” the letter continues, “we ask that the room at Mar-a-Lago where the documents had been stored be secured and that all of the boxes that were moved from the White House to Mar-a-Lago (along with any other items in that room) be preserved in that room in their current condition until further notice.”

Not only were documents reportedly secured under lock and key but were part of the protection detail of the president and his primary residence at Mar-a-Lago. Is the FBI suggesting that the Secret Service cannot be trusted to protect property and if so how could they be entrusted to protect life? Is this a battle among the feds, among other concerns?

Isn’t it ironic that the same federal government that is critical of the operations and appearances of local law enforcement agencies born of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution (resulting in numerous consent decrees) has seemingly little to no regard for the appearance of inequities or impropriety in the course of their own operations?

It is shameful for the FBI to fuel the fires of an already untenable situation against law enforcement by risking a stain on the notion that the goal must always be justice for all.

With the admission by Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg that there was FBI influence over social media’s suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop details during election season, the questionable justification and motivations behind the unprecedented raid of an immediate past president’s residence (@ Mar-a-Lago), the appearance of a two-tiered system of justice, FISA warrant issues, the debunked Russia stories and more, is it any wonder that many question the integrity of federal law enforcement agencies?

Where did the deterioration of the FBI’s reputation really begin to accelerate? Highly political operations within the FBI during the J. Edgar Hoover years notwithstanding, the FBI allowing itself to be used to promulgate the anti-piracy warnings and criminality of copyright infringement at the beginning of much video content via the “FBI WARNING” has placed the

FBI front and center promoting what is perhaps the most widely viewed criminal statute in the United States.

Despite its prominent place in the America’s view, the very existence of criminal liability for violating copyright laws is one that has only ever been intermittently enforced. Despite increasingly stiffer penalties, expanded prosecutorial powers and wide public awareness, criminal enforcement for copyright infringement rarely results in serious liability. Does this make the FBI look unserious via a bark with little bite in the eyes of the public? While Hollywood aggressively warns customers of the criminal repercussions for unlawfully sharing a copyrighted work, in reality, governmental enforcement against online copyright infringement is rare. So the next time you see the FBI’s warning label, it should be recognized as a public service announcement on behalf of the entertainment companies rather than a real threat of prosecution from the U.S.’s highest law enforcement agency.

Federal agencies are in desperate need of a makeover, not blanket defunding. We will always need true enforcement of laws in an even-handed and just manner. Political weaponization of law enforcement, as well as use of law enforcement powers primarily on behalf of private industry concerns, however, have no legitimate place in America and our government would be well-advised to be guided accordingly.

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

If At First You Don’t Succeed, Lie-Lie Again.

The last time I wrote about the police officers involved in the narcotics search warrant where Breonna Taylor was killed, I wrote about Officer Brett Hankison being acquitted by a jury of first-degree wanton endangerment for returning fire as officers were fired on first by Taylor’s drug dealing boyfriend Kenneth Walker. His shot struck one of the officers. I take time to mention these facts because if you read a description of the events from the typical politically biased, cop hating corporate media, they leave these important facts out or gloss over them like they don’t matter. Walker was cleared of any wrongdoing. That is remarkable. He initially lied during the investigation claiming that Taylor shot at officers first then admitted that he fired. That sounds like obstruction to me. This creep threw his dead girlfriend under the bus. What a gentleman.

Three of the officers have been terminated by the Louisville Police Department, termination of the fourth is underway. The Taylor family received one of the largest civil payouts ever, a $12 million settlement with the city before the investigation and trials were complete. Basically, that is the city acknowledging wrongdoing by officers before the officers’ due process rights were exhausted. In my experience, the usually order of the process is that the civil case occurs last, giving way to any criminal proceedings so as not to influence the investigation or a jury and to maintain the presumption of innocence for the officers. Recall that three of the four officers involved were not charged in the state proceedings because a grand jury found that the use of force was justified. Say what, you must be asking yourself? Another fact that the cop hating media won’t mention. In fact, Hankison’s indictment was not for Taylor’s death.

So, let’s pause and add this up. The officers lost their careers, which make their families collateral damage, they suffered public condemnation, the city paid out $12 million in damages and let’s not forget the hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage from ensuing riots. That’s a lot. But it’s not over. In comes the federal government -- the United States Department of Justice to take one more kick at the cat to extract their pound of flesh from this. I call this overkill.

US Attorney General Merrick Garland last week announced that three Louisville Metro police officers have been federally indicted for civil rights violations in the death of Breonna Taylor. In announcing the charges, he said that, “Members of the police-based investigations unit falsified the affidavit used to obtain the search warrant of Ms. Taylor’s home. This act violated federal civil rights laws and those resulted in Miss Taylor’s death.” What? The state grand jury came to a different conclusion. Recall that they said the use of force was justified. One officer has entered into a federal plea agreement to falsifying an affidavit for a search warrant and was not charged on civil rights violations. No problem with that. Garland acknowledged that the officers serving the warrant, “were unaware of its false and misleading statements.” Then how can Garland hold them accountable for violating Taylor’s civil rights?

Let’s switch gears for a moment. What about the FBI knowingly using a false and misleading dossier to dupe a federal magistrate in applying for a FISA warrant to wiretap a Presidential campaign? This went up to the highest levels of the FBI including Director James Comey, Peter Strzok, his lover Lisa Page and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. No criminal indictment was sought for falsifying that. And an agent involved who altered emails regaling the dossier was indicted but received probation. These same people conspired to falsify documents to indict former Lieutenant General Michael Flynn who was wrongly convicted of misleading the FBI. The FBI allege that these officers lied to them during the Taylor investigation. The same behavior that Comey, Strzok, Page and McCabe did to a FISA court but no criminal indictment against them was sought, but I digress.

The most preposterous claim by Garland is that, “Breonna Taylor should be alive today. The Justice Department is committed to defending and protecting the civil rights of every person in this country. That’s what this department’s founding purpose and it remains our urgent mission.” Wrong Mr. Garland. Breonna would be alive today had she made better lifestyle choices than to date a drug dealer with a criminal past who fired at police officers, striking one after they announced themselves. That triggered (no pun intended) the events that caused officers to fire back, lawfully and reasonably, in defense of themselves. Taylor ended up being an unintended consequence of her boyfriend’s act. That is what the state of Kentucky grand jury ruled. And correctly I might add. Nobody else has the courage to say the truth about this event involving Taylor.

The USDOJ is alleging that the officers used unconstitutionally excessive force while engaging in their official capacity. Wait. If an officer is fired upon with a gun, what other force would Garland say would not be excessive, pepper spray?

Additionally, Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke said, “Community Safety dictates that police officers use their weapons only when necessary to defend their own lives or the lives of others and even then, they must do so with great care and caution.” Does she mean like the federal officer who gunned down unarmed Ashley Babbitt as she crawled through a window at the US Capitol to get inside on January 6, 2021? By the way, there were many others standing around Babbitt when she was shot at. Does that meet the definition of using force with great care? It would be very hard even for me to justify that use of force. That investigation was quick and secretive in concluding that it was reasonable. No denial of civil rights investigation ensued. In other words, move along, nothing to see here. The biggest mistake Ashley Babbitt made was being born white. Yeah, I said it.

The lawyer representing the Taylor family, Benjamin Crump, a race-obsessed specialist who always seems to find his way into these high-profile cases, praised the charges, saying it was, “a huge step toward justice.” No, it isn’t. It’s a huge step toward an abuse of power. The family of Ashley Babbitt, on the other hand, is still waiting for answers and justice for Ashley. But she isn’t Black, so no justice is forthcoming. Yeah, I said that too. Cop haters have created a slogan for Taylor: Say her name. Let’s co-opt it for Ashley. Say her name Garland, it’s Ashley Babbitt. He’s simply trying to appease cop haters here. It’s part of the war on cops.

This federal civil rights complaint reeks of being politically motivated. It smells of pandering and moral preening by Merrick Garland. He isn’t looking for justice, he’s out for blood. That is not what the USDOJ mission is nor is it one of their founding principles that Garland mentioned earlier. This has turned into not a legal prosecution but a political persecution. And to think that Merrick Garland almost made it to the United States Supreme Court.

How much more misery are they going to subject these officers to? Or should I say former officers. The most serious charge here carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment upon conviction. This action by the USDOJ is more about revenge than a search for justice. Meanwhile Kenneth Walker walks away with no accountability.

After watching all this unfold, what person would want to pursue a career in local law enforcement?

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

A GLIMPSE OF WHAT COPS DEAL WITH AND THINGS THAT HAUNT THEM

Cops are more than ( in my case) just 230lbs of police meat smothered in gear and Kevlar.
Many of us are educated way beyond what the job calls for. An often used quote attributed to Michelangelo “I am still learning “ is appropriate for many of the men and women who wear the shield, therefore do not underestimate us.
We often find ourselves shouldering the burdens of society of which the public has no idea, because we conceal it behind the masks we often wear. We’re often guarded, but there are hundreds of stories culled from as many calls and encounters. I am among many things, a poet.
This piece was written after running non-stop for about 10 days back and forth between Missouri and and the seedier parts of Illinois just across the Missouri River in the city of Alton, Illinois .
A prostitute was murdered ( probably in Alton) and dumped naked in an abandoned house in St Louis County.
As an investigator for the Major Case Squad we were tasked with investigating her murder. I’m talking about round the clock, hard-police-door-knocks in search of a killer, in the soft white underbelly of neighborhoods awash in drugs, prostitution and every crime imaginable.
The assembly of detectives are usually handpicked, for their specific skill set and “take no shit” personalities. Running on little or no sleep, lots of coffee and adrenaline, quick trips to shower and change into a new suit. Prostitution or whatever the victim did to pay the bills or feed the habit, however someone gets “unalive” by violent means , we investigate with the same vigor, tenacity, and aggression. People need to understand that. We go into the shittiest, dangerous, neighborhoods and deal with people , so fucked up, each is a story or book unto themselves.
Every copper or detective has one or several ghosts that haunt them. This is one of mine. The success rate of the squad is quite high, unfortunately this was one that we couldn’t close.
100%, I know who the killer was, but I had no physical evidence to get a conviction. The frustration we face is overwhelming. As I thought about the victim and her murder, this poem is the byproduct of her ghost. She haunts me.
And I’m still learning.

Thoughts On Finding The Body Incorrupt

Oh you
Black Madonna
Asleep in the cool dirt
On the floor of an abandoned farmhouse
Just past the muddy river
Brown as your skin
Naked
Bathed in a shaft of light
Swirls of fine dust
Uncertain if rising or falling
As I climbed through the frameless window
Trying to avoid disturbing
Not your sleep
But the place where you slept
In its grim finality
Where your earthly shell
Discarded
Facedown in the gravel
Left behind after the floodwaters subsided

When I rolled you over
The first thing I saw and still remember
Your face
Your skin
Perfect
Waxen
Even after several days
Asleep in your death
Your murder
A crooked smile
Thin and homely
Yet still, once
Someone’s little girl
Or teenage crush
A little bookish
In photos I would later study

Now, simply a murdered prostitute, hooker, whore
Or angel, albeit fallen
Tossed away like a piece of trash
A consequence of a lifestyle
We assembled to champion for you
The body incorrupt
Saintly
A wilted flower
Two bullets to the chest
Smiling at me
Face pocked with white gravel
You know the secret, but won’t tell

Just another dump job
Not a trace
No help
And still
Just that crooked smile

On the morning you were found
A final look
Before you were loaded into a body bag
Carefully carried to a white van
To take you on the next leg of your journey

Later
Returning to that house
Back through the window
Still cool inside
My wingtip stirring in the dust
As I leaned against the wall

Brimming with tears
No one to see
Closing my eyes
Just that crooked smile
And I
Simply worn out

© Kirk Lawless
Crossing The Divide (from the poets of St. Louis)
Selection by Michael Castro 2016 Vagabond Press

PERCEPTION - THE APPEARANCE OF OUR ACTIONS MATTER!

By: Joel E. Gordon “Your job gives you authority. Your behavior gives you respect” - Irwin Federman

Let me start by reaffirming that I bleed BLUE and believe that the overwhelming majority of law enforcement personnel are competent, courteous, concerned and caring!

However, law enforcement must periodically take a step back and take an honest and closer look at what brought us into an environment of disdain toward law enforcement, defunding efforts, and worsened adversarial encounters on a seemingly more frequent basis.

While many reasons may be through no fault of our own, my thoughts are focused on where our own responsibilities lie. Like many other retirees and veteran law enforcement professionals, in many respects, I find myself to be disappointed and dismayed, no longer recognizing the profession in many ways. From active-duty liability fears for clearly doing what’s right to stand down orders and other burdensome guidance resulting from cultural shifts, the profession has been moved in ways beyond my comprehension.

A little historical perspective: My first encounter with law enforcement occurred as a young teen on a beautiful early summer day in 1974. While riding my bicycle, I spotted a large mixed-breed (German shepherd-type) dog weaving in and out of traffic at a busy intersection. I was convinced that I was about to witness the dog being struck by a car. As luck (or so I thought) would have it, a police officer was sitting in his marked patrol car right there in a parking lot. As I approached the officer he opened the driver’s side window as if it was a big chore for him to do. I asked, “Can you please help me with the dog before he gets hit?” The officer looked over at me through the open driver’s side window of the patrol car, and curtly stated; “Who do you think I am? SUPERMAN?” (In spite of the officer’s unnecessarily rude response and refusal to assist, the dog was saved).

Back to more recent times, I was made aware of a situation where an officer was dispatched at the request of EMS on a forced entry to a private residence not knowing if they may be faced with a dangerous individual or encounter. The officer responded disgustedly on-air “For God sakes they have as much authority to force entry as we do.” So who is supposed to make a scene safe, anyway? While discourteous interactions such as these are contributing factors in a divide among those who should be working together, investigations which result in the appearance of partiality can add further to diminished support.

I was involved in a serious crash when a full-size city bus rear-ended the car I was operating after I had yielded onto and had already began travel on an interstate highway. Upon arrival of local law enforcement, the responding officer took an immediate statement from the bus driver on-scene, but refused to take my statement, instead insisting on a statement from me via email. I was, in fact, admitted as a trauma patient overnight to the hospital as a result of the crash after driving myself for an examination but took time to prepare and email the statement from my hospital bed. The statement included incriminating statements by the bus operator over his failure to control and rush to get to his destination. When I paid to obtain the crash report I discovered that the reporting officer had falsely claimed that I had never sent the statement (which I maintained proof of) and listed the primary cause of the crash as my failure to yield right-of-way. Right or wrong, nothing that transpired will change the feeling that I had on-scene that the officer would work to cover for the public transportation bus operator. If I feel that way, is it any wonder others question investigative integrity? Add to the mix those law enforcement agencies that were enforcing Executive Orders on pandemic business closures and mask wearing directives, making enforcers of the LAW something that they were never intended to be and turning many law-abiding citizens against those taking these actions. This is akin to the same objections I have always had in enlisting law enforcement in the involvement in such regulations as community covenants pertaining to items such as fence setbacks, plantings, grass cutting (or lack thereof), approval of exterior property paint color selections and like issues.

In this day and age there seems to be a great tendency for government to overplay its hand. Certainly, the perception that federal law enforcement, such as the FBI, has the strong appearance of being politicized and the Department of Justice seems to overwhelmingly fit into this category of overreach and inconsistent enforcement and investigatory actions. In law enforcement, as public servants, we each must play it straight and right down the middle. Anything less than an impartial, helpful attitude of community service in law enforcement is unacceptable. While there is always a time and place for firmness and ensuring compliance to lawful orders we must make certain that law enforcement is right in doing so. If it isn't within the sworn obligation to constitutional values, impartiality, and duty to service of our profession in holding the line as society's protectors, then it's time for re-evaluation in operations and attitude.

Shouldn’t actions, whenever possible, encourage even more supporters and fewer enemies? Of the people, by the people, and for the people should be our guiding principle. We will all be the better for it.

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

'Post-woke:' The Pendulum Swings!

Federally indicted @MarilynMosbyEsq has been voted out in Baltimore. Like in San Fran when they ousted Chesa Boudin, hard working members of our communities are speaking w/a loud voice…we want law and order! About time every ‘woke’ politician gets that through their thick heads. - Joe Gamaldi

When you give the progressives rope, they sure know what to do with it. With seemingly little to no regard for positive results in the matters that are most important to the electorate, the progressive playbook and plans could not be any more destined for failure as if by design.

World-renowned scholar Thomas Sowell has identified three questions that when asked of progressive liberals about their ideas won’t pass the test of logic, reasoning or common sense in most cases:

•Compared to what?
•At what cost?
•What hard evidence do you have?

In Baltimore, it turns out that a collective citizen revolt against progressivism, in making Marilyn Mosby third in votes out of a field of three candidates, resulted is a much stronger leadership statement than what Baltimoreans’ have been getting from their elected leaders and their appointees. When evaluating the questions of Thomas Sowell, the answer became clear. The same holds true for San Francisco and likely elsewhere as we move forward.

Other ‘woke’ prosecutors who are in jeopardy of being run out of office:

·       Alvin Bragg (D), Manhattan

·       George Gascon (D), Los Angeles

·       Kim Foxx (D), Chicago

·       Larry Krasner (D), Philadelphia

·       John Chisolm (D), Milwaukee

·       Kevin Hayden (D), Boston

·       Kim Gardner (D), St. Louis

·       Mike Schmidt (D), Portland

…and many lesser-known district attorneys of the same ilk.

Back in Baltimore, the momentum against current Baltimore Police Commissioner Michael Harrison’s retention is gaining. Harrison, whose hire was endorsed by the Police Executive Research Forum, was hired for consent decree implementation rather than crime reduction or strong agency leadership. With grotesque crime rates in the city of Baltimore, does it seem likely with the ouster of Marilyn Mosby that city officials will finish the job with removal of Harrison too?

The precedent now seems to have been set. Both locally and nationally, Democrats will pay for what they are doing to President Trump, Steve Bannon, the January 6th defendants, other political prosecution victims and the American people. Keep poking the bear. It is rumored that a plan is in place to really drain the swamp of select federal civil service employees under potential future Republican executive leadership. The number of employees affected potentially could top 50,000 per reports. RINOs (Republicans in name only) like Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, who refuses to back the Trump-endorsed Republican nominee to replace him as governor, beware too.

The America First Policy Institute has presented a new Republican-endorsed “Contract with America” known as the America First Agenda:

1. MAKE THE GREATEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD WORK FOR ALL AMERICANS

2. PUT PATIENTS AND DOCTORS BACK IN CHARGE OF HEALTHCARE

3. RESTORE AMERICA’S HISTORIC COMMITMENT TO FREEDOM, EQUALITY, AND SELF-GOVERNANCE

4. GIVE PARENTS MORE CONTROL OVER THEIR CHILDREN’S EDUCATION

5. FINISH THE WALL, END HUMAN TRAFFICKING, AND DEFEAT THE DRUG CARTELS

6. DELIVER PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH AND AMERICAN LEADERSHIP

7. MAKE AMERICA ENERGY INDEPENDENT

8. MAKE IT EASY TO VOTE AND HARD TO CHEAT

9. PROVIDE SAFE AND SECURE COMMUNITIES SO ALL AMERICANS CAN LIVE THEIR LIVES IN PEACE

10. FIGHT GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION BY DRAINING THE SWAMP

I can only imagine the choices that will be made to lead the Department of Justice in an Attorney General and the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, ATF, DHS, ICE, NSA, and more to achieve the goals outlined above.

Meanwhile, the voters are speaking clearly… The “post-woke” era has begun!

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

SAVING COUNTLESS LIVES: 15 SECONDS OF A GOOD GUY WITH A GUN

By: Joel E. Gordon

One of the mysteries of the ages is why the political left has, for centuries, lavished so much attention on the well-being of criminals and paid so little attention to their victims. - Thomas Sowell

The young man’s name is Elisjsha Dicken. He is from Southern Indiana. He was at Greenwood Park Mall shopping with his girlfriend. The mall is about 37 miles north of his farm.

The Greenwood Park Mall shooter began firing at 5:56:48PM. 15 SECONDS LATER, at 5:57:03, 22-year-old Eli Dicken carrying under the new NRA-Backed Constitutional Carry law, fired 10 rounds from a reported 30 yards, hitting the shooter eight times. Johnson County Coroner Mike Pruitt said an autopsy found the suspect had eight gunshot wounds and none were self-inflicted.

Eli was shopping with his girlfriend when the gunman opened fire into the crowded mall food court. Greenwood Police Chief James Ison on the "Good Samaritan" who stopped mall shooting: "His actions were nothing short of heroic. He engaged the gunman from quite a distance with a handgun, was very proficient in that, very tactically sound as he moved to close in on the suspect, he was also motioning for people to exit behind him...he has no police training and no military background."

Dicken was carrying a 9-MM Glock, according to Ison. After confirming the shooter was no longer a threat, Dicken approached mall security and cooperated with officers. He was handcuffed and questioned by officers, but released upon verification of his actions via surveillance video.

Unencumbered by rules or regulation, as a police department employee would be, only armed with a semi-automatic pistol, proficiency, common-sense, and a desire to save lives, Eli is a hero despite the anti-gun crowd calling him a "vigilante." The fact remains that a good guy with a gun actively engaged a gunman with evil intent saving countless lives.

It is important to recognize that there are still good people willing to put themselves in harm’s way. Eli’s story needs to be told. A good young man had to do an awful thing and everyone should be grateful for it. Eli defended himself and those around him. There was not time to wait for the police.

The fact is that gun-free or heavily gun restricted zones have historically been places of great danger as a soft target enticement to mass shooting maniacs.

Think that tough, anti-gun law localities provide the answer to public safety? Think again. Just look at places with the toughest gun laws like New York, DC and Chicago. Criminals, by definition, don’t obey laws so law-abiding are the ones largely affected; the same citizens who sometimes are capable of reacting with the quick thought and proficiency of an Eli Dicken. Researchers at Texas State University analyzed data that shows there were 266 shootings over a 20-year period where the shooter was stopped from actively killing people. 24 of those – or nine percent – were stopped by an armed bystander killing the shooter.

Perhaps that figure of those stopped by an armed bystander would be higher if there were more highly proficient armed citizens at the ready during moments of crisis? Looking at the places with the lowest murder rates and their long standing gun policies provides insight into what may be an uncomfortable truth to some.

Both New Hampshire and Vermont allow law-abiding citizens the right to carry firearms. No license needed. New Hampshire has the lowest gun homicide rate in the country, Vermont is second.

When the Supreme Court recently struck down New York State's onerous handgun carry law, the progressives screamed that it would cause more "gun violence." That is easily refuted. So, those leftists lose the argument. It’s long past time to take an honest, pragmatic look at violence in America with a view toward known proven positive results.

In the meantime here’s to you Mr. Dicken.

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group. Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

19 July 2009-19 July 2022 (13th year anniversary of my fatal OIS)

First of all, I’m not looking for a pity party where I sit at the head of the table. I don’t need “are you okays?”

I don’t need anybody to feel sorry for me. I “Really” don’t need any unlearned jackasses to tell me to get over it, or move past it and get on with my life (so far, for me, not possible)

I’ll use this as a teachable moment. For cops, young and old, because you are all one “New York” trigger pull (12lbs) away from dealing with the same shit.

Thirteen years is a long time to carry heavy shit. It’s on a continuous loop. I replay the killing of a bad guy every. Blessed. Day. I relive it multiple times a day. There are too many triggers to avoid ( 4th of July , the week prior and week after, where the pyromaniacs continued to blow shit up near my house were a particular hoot)

I’ve attached the audio to this post ( I’m not sure if it will work on the column. If it doesn’t, visit my Facebook page and you can find it) …sorry I couldn’t post the audio folks

It should run real time. I’ve gone over the recording many, many times and from the time of the call to the time I called out shots fired is about 2 minutes 22 seconds. From the time I go 23 (on scene) to broadcasting “shots fired” is a little shy of ten seconds.

That’s not much time to get ready, get there, have someone actively try to kill you (OODA loop), outdraw them and you kill them first (technically, it took him a few minutes to bleed out enough to silence his screams and curses) get him handcuffed, call an ambulance, and keep watch over an active home invasion robbery, interrupting an attempted assassination of two occupants of a mistaken drug house while not knowing there were additional armed bandits in the house who abandoned their blanket covered would-be victims and not executing them (because the cops showed up).

I still hear the bad guy’s spirit leaving his body. I could no nothing for him but pray that he passed quickly and had a chance to make peace with his maker.

I can still smell the gunpowder, still see the muzzle flashes. I can remember everything about that night, the darkness, the heat and humidity. And yes, I can still smell his blood (we were that close).

Sounds haunting? I wouldn’t do one thing different except have a camera crew with me because it would have been a great training aid. None of that haunts me really (although I think about it a lot… maybe it does haunt me), but the tidal wave of bullshit that would soon wash over me, with every boss and white shirt that showed up on the scene.

The armchair quarterbacking was laughable (from guys who had done nothing extraordinary in their careers)

The preliminary “It appears to be a legitimate shoot,” said a white shirt on the phone to a turd of a politician , too lazy to get his ass out of bed to see for himself. Does that haunt me? Yes! Daily!

The violation of my civil rights and the rights of two other officers, by bosses whom I would label as idiots (and that’s not fair to real idiots).

Word to the wise: keep your mouth shut. As soon as they start questioning one thing you had to do to stay alive…stop! Hire a lawyer. A good one. Every major city has a lawyer who is “That guy”, so yes, hire “That guy!”

Do not enlist the help of an FOP attorney (change my mind) Here in the Midwest I found them to be no more than toothless dogs. If you do, and the pendulum swings in the direction of you being a bad guy, you might find yourself on the inside of a prison cell (especially in the current anti-police climate).

“Keep your mouth shut !“

It took nearly ten years to face off in court to argue my department “separating” from me citing “inability to do the job.” All because I had a prick of a boss taking jabs and me and he was allowed to do so untethered.

I asked for reasonable accommodations as I needed some time to decompress and needed some help to deal with the weight I was carrying. I was told that light duty did not exist. And that was that. The trial was a three-ring circus loaded with rats (including my own attorney). I’m sure the judge was a rat too (or just too stupid to ride the bench).

The city found out that I had an implanted cardiac defibrillator/ pacemaker in my chest and instead of being glad at the way I performed my job with it on board, they acted as though it was a hindrance and/or a liability (it was neither)

I was eviscerated in front of my family and a few friends. The only cops from my department in the courtroom were there under subpoena (had they made an appearance, there would have been Hell to pay! The lies they told haunt me like a rotten ghost! And I mean every. Night!

The jury was bamboozled and lied to. Scenarios surrounding the end of my career, visit me every night and I can’t do shit about it! Meds don’t turn it off! So, I cope. I deal with it.

I don’t drink. I don’t do illegal drugs. I don’t over medicate!

I wake up and it’s “Well, I’m still alive, better get up and get after it!”

So I take what happened to me and share it with recruits (or anybody who cares to listen)

The point is, I am still alive. I have purpose. I have value. I have honor and integrity and those are qualities and blessings that cannot be taken from me. I am fearless. I am still deadly if need be. And, I’m not afraid of death.

If I can stay alive, so can you. If I can stop one more cop from serving himself or herself a last meal of a gun barrel sautéed in Hoppe’s No. 9, I’ll keep doing it. I ain’t gonna kill myself!

Right now, I have bandaids on eight of my ten fingers. The PTS has me tearing at the skin around my nails until blood runs down my fingers and hands. Oddly, the pain reminds me that I’m alive.

And, 19 July draws closer, I really feel alive.

You will have haters if you do your job and do it well. If you’ve done your job, “Fuck em”

If you’re struggling, reach out to someone. I’m easy to find. Call me 314-302-0511. I’m just a guy, but I’ll help you if I can.

Stay safe!

Kirk

IN THE NEWS

I want to begin this column talking about a few developments that occurred recently that are begging for additional comment, and who better to provided that commentary than yours truly?

The first comes out of the state of Arizona, where the legislature recently passed a bill making it a misdemeanor offense for anyone filming a police officer within eight feet after having been warned to stop doing so. The bil,l signed into law by Gov. Doug Ducey, is intended to create a buffer to prevent clashes with police and bystanders in tense situations.

My initial reaction when I read this story was, it’s about time. We have all sat and watched demonstrators and rioters get right up in the face of police officers who are standing in a police line and yell obscenities, spit at and throw objects like rocks, batteries and urine- and feces-filled balloons at police when the officers are doing nothing more than holding the line, as they say. You also have undoubtedly seen bystanders with their cellphone cameras where police are conducting a field interview or a traffic stop. This is an officer safety issue, as it distracts officers away from the subject they have detained and thus have to watch both that person and the crowd or the group heckling police. Every state should enact such a law. Officers are trained to keep people out of their lunge area-that amount of distance between them and a subject. That area keeps distance between someone going after their gun or other piece of equipment that once obtained can be used against the officer. What I find peculiar, however, is how they determined 8 feet as the distance. They should have made it an even 10 if for no other reason than to give police a few more feet of protection.

The next news story comes out of Miami, where a Miami-Dade officer conducting a traffic stop on a motorist not wearing a seat belt made an utterance that has many people including the media losing their mind. During the exchange the officer asks for the driver’s license, registration and proof of insurance and told the driver to turn off the engine. That’s standard. The driver could not find his license or registration and didn’t turn the car off as ordered. The officer, after receiving the driver’s license, says in the on-going exchange, “A simple thing man, this is how you guys get killed out here.” OK. Not the smoothest way to talk to people but not the worst things I have heard cops say in dealing with the public.

Now the vultures are circling overhead in this anti-police environment trying to make it on the level of some of the other high-profile incidents involving police. Yes, over this. Now everybody is giving their opinion of what the officer meant by that statement. My reaction is, yeah, I heard the officer say it. Who flipping cares? That officer will have to defend what he meant by his statement. And now the Metro-Dade police have started an internal investigation and have removed the officer from street duty and placed him on administrative leave desk duty. Seriously? Over this? That reaction by the Miami-Dade Police Department feeds into the hair on fire reaction from the cop-hating crowd. An appropriate disposition here would be for the officer’s supervisor to counsel him with a verbal warning about interpersonal communication, maybe even order some additional training on it. The chief of the department should have said to the media soon after the incident, let’s move on.

Speaking of how guys get killed out here, another police deadly use of force in Akron, Ohio has captured national attention. Although each incident is intricately different, there are some similar aspects. This involves a police stop for a traffic violation, the driver refusing to pull over and stop, the driver leading police on a high-speed pursuit during which it is reported that he fired shots at pursuing officers.

Additional facts are that he finally pulls over and continues to flee on foot. Oh, and another thing: He was wearing a ski mask over his head. Like that is normal behavior.

Now, let’s unpack this. Fleeing from police according to a Supreme Court case, Illinois v Wardlow, is the height of suspicious activity and police then have reasonable suspicion to pursue to find out why the subject is fleeing. Leading police on a high-speed vehicle pursuit puts the officers in grave danger as well as other motorists in the area. And then there is the firing on pursuing officers. As the suspect is fleeing, he turns toward the officers making eye contact. That is called target acquisition, a move necessary for the armed subject to complete before firing on them. It is reasonable for officers responding who have already been fired upon to conclude that he would shoot at them again. They opened fire, killing the suspect. The suspect’s gun was found inside his vehicle. Now comes the typical knee-jerk reaction from the media, the family and other cop haters.

About 60 shots were fired by the reported seven or eight responding officers during the incident. Everybody is up in arms about the number of shots fired. I am not. The suspect was armed, as I indicated, and fired on officers during the pursuit. As far as I am concerned, all bets are off. Nothing in the law on use of force indicates the number of shots officers can fire after being shot at. They are allowed to use a level of force to overcome the resistance, not equally meet it. I know how officers train in these situations in a sterile environment of a shooting range. We train them to fire two to three round bursts then reassess.

Anybody who thinks that that will actually be the case in a high-adrenaline situation where you have already been shot at is out of their mind. I have investigated police officer use of force shootings. Most time they cannot even tell you how many times they fired. That is normal as parts of their brain shut down. They are not counting their rounds like on a firing range. They will get to explain their actions. Under what I have just described however, the Chief of the agency should get out ahead of this to frame a narrative that gets into the minds of the public before the lies and misinformation that will come from the media and the cop-haters.

Here are a few example headlines from major news sources on this incident: “Video shows Akron Cops Kill Unarmed Man In A Hail Of Bullets”, “Sickening Footage Shows Akron Cops Kill An Unarmed Man In A Hail Of Bullets”, “Jayland Walker was unarmed when 8 Ohio officers opened fire.” One story even pointed out that suspect Walker was unarmed and running away. Obviously, certain important facts were left out of these stories like the fact that he refused to comply with officers’ commands to take him into custody and instead led police on a high-speed pursuit, and Walker firing on officers before they fired on him and that he was wearing a ski mask.

The investigation is ongoing, but my experience in investigating these police use of force leads me to believe that these officers acted reasonably under the circumstances.

And like the Miami-Dade officer said, that’s how these guys get killed out here.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Baltimore: Is the handwriting on the wall?

By: Joel E. Gordon

“Baltimore leadership ... you took the city down this path. You chased after a consent decree handcuffing your own cops, while turning the city over to criminals,” - Anthony Barksdale tweet (November 2017)

Does being a loud critic of current policy, even when you have a previous track record of real successes, pay off in the end in today's “progressive” “'cancel culture” world? If you answered “no way” Anthony Barksdale might be the one to prove you wrong. In a somewhat surprising turn of events, Barksdale, a native of West Baltimore, was appointed as the city's next deputy mayor for public safety by Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott effective July 11, 2022. As deputy mayor for public safety, Barksdale will oversee the policies and operations of the city's public safety agencies -- BPD, the Mayor's Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement and the Baltimore City Fire Department, including the Office of Emergency Management -- and the implementation of the city's consent decree.

Barksdale was part of Commissioner Ed Norris’ security detail and has said he learned about the fundamentals of policing from Jack Maple, the New York police officer who created that city’s Compstat data analysis program. Promoted through the ranks, Barksdale has years of law enforcement expertise and a deep knowledge of the city, having served as deputy commissioner of operations and, later, as interim police commissioner.

Barksdale ran operations for the Police Department from 2007-2012, a period during which the city saw reductions in gun violence, including fewer than 200 homicides, emphasizing accountability from commanders related to crime in their districts. Not without critics, some say that was achieved through a heavy-handed approach and aggressive policing. Now Barksdale will be current Commissioner Harrison’s boss. Are Harrison’s remaining days in Baltimore numbered?

In 2020, Barksdale was interviewed by Fox45-TV and said he had “no faith” in Harrison. Asked why, he said: “I’m looking at the data.”

“I see a continued failure by executive command, the commissioner and his top team, to understand how to fight violent crime,” Barksdale also said in 2020 during a WBAL Radio interview. “They’re missing deployments, across the city of Baltimore, over and over again.”

“Commissioner Harrison and his Kentucky Deputy of Operations [former Louisville Police Deputy Chief Michael Sullivan, who is now overseeing the BPD’s consent decree compliance bureau] are leaving citizens and officers vulnerable,” he tweeted in 2020, referring to orders Harrison issued early in the pandemic. “Absolutely idiotic and reason to remove him and his entire team!”

In September 2018, Barksdale tweeted: “Things were supposed to get better under the consent decree, right? Wrong!” In an Op-Ed in February 2021, Barksdale said more needs to be done to protect Black communities experiencing violence.

“The vast majority of victims of violence in Baltimore and other cities are Black and Brown children, women, and men,” he wrote. “While I understand the sentiment behind those who wish to move away from policing, we need to maintain focus on the suffering, and loss happening right now in these neighborhoods. Police play a vital role in protecting the vulnerable within them.”

He continued: “I believe in using data to make crime-fighting decisions. The data is screaming for more to be done across the United States to keep Black and brown communities safe. We must have the courage to confront the daily violence Black and brown citizens are facing with targeted and proactive engagement against the shooters and killers. We cannot afford to wait, we must turn this around.”

During a news conference to announce his appointment, Barksdale addressed his past remarks. “While I’m here, while I’m speaking, I owe someone an apology for past statements,” he said. “I’m man enough to say, ‘I’m sorry Commissioner Harrison if I said anything in the past that is offensive to you. I want to work with you. I know we are going to work great together.’”

“I can work with anyone,” Harrison said. “I have been given strict assurances by the mayor that the deputy mayor is here to support. ... I alone am the commissioner. I alone make the day-to-day decisions for the Baltimore Police Department. The mayor has given me strict assurances that will be my job.”

Mayor Scott said that hiring Barksdale was not a decision that he came to lightly, but which he made because, “He is someone that I believe in and someone that I know and trust, who has a heart for Baltimore and wants it to be the safest city it can be.”

The mayor said his office spent months searching for the right person for the job. “I wanted it to be someone with a proven track record on public safety and with a deep knowledge in our city.” Something that Police Executive Research Forum endorsed and former New Orleans Louisiana Police Chief Michael Harrison is not. Stay tuned for future developments.

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Is An Extra Three Inches Too Much To Ask For?

Three inches extra doesn’t seem like too much to ask for; especially when it comes to your safety and well-being.  To all my cop friends out there (young and old), this is very important, as your life may well depend on what I’m laying down here,  “I’m talking about your body armor, so listen up.”

We’ve come a long way in the technology of body armor and its ability to stop a projectile from entering your body meat.  The misnomer since we started this journey was the use of the term “bullet proof.” We now refer to it as “bullet resistant.” That’s a simple way to say, “There is no guarantee that body armor will 100% stop anything fired upon us, getting inside our bodies uninvited.”

When you’re a young copper, (myself included) you feel a bit invincible, even more so when that vest goes on and you head out to your shift. When you’re a “baby” police officer and your skull hasn’t completely formed yet, it’s easy to fall into a sense of false security. You may be gullible and accept what your department spoon-feeds you. Or, you’ll do your own research and pay attention, at least to this article, or something similar and enlighten yourself.

I’ll go into way more detail in my next article, but for now you’ll get the meat of the meal.

First, there are some cops who just flat-out refuse to wear body armor, ever.  That’s just foolish. Now, there are special circumstances when body armor is impractical, such as working in an undercover capacity, narcotics for instance.  When I was actively buying dope on the streets of St. Louis, back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, I didn’t wear body armor (for the obvious reason) during deals.

If you don’t wear any body armor and some shit bird wants to put metal to your meat, it will happen with monotonous regularity! I know lots of cops who have been shot and survived, some got penetrated, some were saved from grievous injury by their body armor. Some were killed, when obviously hit somewhere that wasn’t protected by body armor. Some got shot up so bad they had to go off the job.  Many ended up paralyzed.

28 May 2012, one of my police brothers got bushwhacked by an asshole who popped out of a dumpster and hit my friend three times. Over a fucking television taken in a home invasion robbery (I’ll be telling his story in a future article, and you will be amazed by it)!

Hit three times and lying on the asphalt, my friend couldn’t move, but he heard enough movement near him that he believed the skel was coming back to deliver the coup de grace. That did not happen. Unfortunately, his assailant was captured with no bullets in his body. My good friend was paralyzed and to this day is confined to a wheelchair and living far away from here.

Here’s the lesson. And, if any of this sounds familiar, don’t be shy about getting on somebody’s ass to make things right! On that I cannot be more serious; the politicians and brass (for the most part) do not give a solitary fuck about us, especially when it comes to money.  Cutting corners when it comes to the safety those of us tasked with keeping the community safe should be criminal, and there should be a level of accountability across the entire country in matters such as these.

Corporate America, at least here, is usually protected by the courts and the cities and police department are often granted “sovereign immunity” when it comes to legal actions filed against them.

My friend found out, after recovering from his bullet holes and broken bones, that there was a problem, a huge problem.  The problem was with his body armor.

Quite simply, the vest failed him. Just like the police department failed him, just like the politicians failed him.

My brother filed a lawsuit against the city, the PD and primarily, the body armor company. Not shocking, the city, the PD, and everybody else involved on that end were quickly off the hook. That left the body armor company holding the bag.

Here’s what my brother officer, his wife (expecting their first child when he was shot) learned.  One of the rounds that entered his body did so after passing through a panel of his vest. Yes, the panel of the vest!  The vest company (I won’t even mention the name. You can easily find it on your own) argued that because of the trajectory of the bullet, once fired, it could not be stopped by their product. Just like that.  The company added that the outer three inches around each panel was incapable of stopping projectiles (within their NIJ rating) 81% of the time. Eighty-one per cent! Did you know that? I didn’t! Eighty-one fucking percent!  Take your vest panels out right now and measure three inches all the way around that thing and see how much less coverage there is, where you stand a 19% chance of it stopping a projectile!  Now check the date on that thing. If it’s expired (or getting close) demand a new one! Right now!  Would you drink spoiled milk or chug the last of the bottle at midnight on the expiration date?

Inspect it, from every angle.  Check for creases or bunched-up areas in the panels. Guess what?  Those are weak spots. And weak spots are potential entry points for metallic shit, traveling at high velocities, wanting to play hide and seek in your guts with a trauma surgeon.

The vest company (corporate America) won the case in court. Hey, It’s St. Louis, not shocking.

The company suggested that when our superiors instructed all of us on how to wear a vest (nobody ever told me about how to wear a vest in 28 years on the job) after we were fitted (“fitted” as in a tape measure thrown around your chest and “Hey, Charlie this guy’s a 2x).  They also suggested that the vest overlap, front panel over rear panel.  This is all bullshit. I have never during a long and storied career had a vest that had any overlap. Zero. If we were lucky, the panels touched or maybe came close (but remember the 3” so that point is moot)

My suggestion, wear a military armor plate carrier with side plates and anti-spall coating.  If the department doesn’t like it, tell them to kiss your ass!

Look on YouTube for the CEO of the vest company (PPSS) who tests his own product, or look up Richard Davis, who has shot himself more than 200 times while wearing his product.

When the vest rep shows up, ask him if he’d be so kind as to go to the range so you can test a vest he’s wearing; likewise the purchasing agent (whether civilian or brass) and see what happens.

Remember that 3” and the 81% (straight from the horse’s mouth … in court no less).  Check the expiration date on the vest. Have your friends do the same. Inspect those things, and for crying out loud store them “flat,” not on a hanger! Don’t rely on the 3” and do your own research! As far as the brass and politicians are concerned, “It’s cheaper to bury a cop, than fix one.”

Three inches would cost them a little over $50 per vest. Certainly we are worth way more than that!

 I've never been told what your editorial policy is when it comes to this word, so I'll leave it for you.

Kirk Lawless is a 28 year, decorated, veteran police officer from the St Louis area. He’s a former SWAT operator, narcotics agent, homicide investigator, detective and Medal of Valor recipient. Off the job due to an up close and personal gunfight, he now concentrates on writing. He’s a patriotic warrior, artist, poet, actor, musician, and man of peace.

Contact : kirklawless@yahoo.com

Baltimore City Council: From Woke to Alarmed and Awakened!

Baltimore, once known by a tag line "The City that Reads" became the City that Bleeds with murders and violent crime out of control.

Members of the Baltimore City Council have more recently become frustrated over the mayor’s and police commissioner’s longer-term crime reduction plans which have thus far been largely ineffective and openly being criticized all the way up to the Maryland State House and Maryland Governor Larry Hogan.

“The community are looking at us as a joke,” Councilmember Antonio Glover said during the Tuesday night hearing.  

His reaction was one of many tense moments that arose inside Baltimore City Hall during the hearing.

“I am absolutely disgusted with the state of public safety in this city,” Councilmember Eric Costello said. “My hope is that we can get some answers tonight and that members of this Ways and Means Committee can walk away from this meeting and reassure our constituents that you have this all under control.”

Baltimore City Police Commissioner Michael Harrison pushed back against his critics, “Let me set this record straight right here and right now . . . Our sense of urgency is set to maximum and it stays there and it never turns off,” Harrison said.

The scathing questions were continuous as council members strived to determine if Harrison was doing enough to make the streets safer.

“We are going after drug dealers and making those cases every single day,” Harrison said.

Councilmember Robert Stokes expressed dissatisfaction with Harrison’s remarks

“You just gave me statistics,” he said. “I asked for a plan about the open drug market. You told me about arrests. People in the community want to know ‘What is the plan?’ Not how many people were arrested.”

Conway asks Commission Harrison what are his pressing challenges. Harrison cited:

-Staffing
-Swift and certain consequences (court outcomes)
-'Systemic issues and root cause issues'
-Officer morale

Stokes says officers say they're hindered by the consent decree. Harrison: "That's code language for, 'I can't do things the way we used to do it.' Harrison then said that is code for, 'I can't be brutal and drag people off and make them do what I want them to do.' ” Really? So what defines a “good cop?” Does the city want aggressive constitutional proactive policing or tie hands behind the back of the officers on the beat?

Commissioner Harrison’s micro zone patrol strategy in areas of high crime was called out as being disingenuous given staffing shortages and a history of crime displacement resulting from past micro zones.

This is why front line officers must be nimble and emboldened with reasonable autonomy to react more swiftly to fluid situations and changes in criminal activity than as a result of a weekly micromanagement analysis and strategy. Trying to micromanage something that office based commanders don't fully understand, through data driven policing not at the post officer level via weekly Compstat meetings with stale data, is no substitute for real-time database deployment in the field.

If enhanced public safety and crime reduction are the desired results then perhaps commendation and bonus compensation for crime reduction should be based upon achievement of those goals from the police commissioner through the ranks down to the post patrol officer who has their finger on the pulse of their primary area of responsibility?

After the recent incident where a Baltimore city police sergeant who was doing his job and was dragged by a vehicle operated by an armed fleeing traffic violator, a repeat violent offender with a lengthy rap sheet of at least 19 arrests as an adult, Baltimore media pressed the police commissioner to call out problems in the judicial system specifically prosecutorial issues with Marilyn Mosby and her office but he stopped short of criticizing her. While Commissioner Harrison said the his department provides the prosecutor with quality cases he wouldn’t call her out on lax prosecutorial actions saying he didn’t do her evaluations and that the department doesn’t always know what goes into the prosecutor’s decision making process on cases.

One thing’s for certain, wrong-headed thinking by “progressives” of varying degrees has gotten us to where we are today. If law enforcement officers displayed the temperament of an AOC, Maxine Waters or others of the same ilk, they would be fired and deemed unworthy of continued employment in the pursuit of law and order… and rightfully so.

Police must be once again emboldened to enforce the law and the most reasonable and honest of the politicians and law enforcement leaders must support those law enforcement efforts, be guided accordingly, and boldly say so.

 Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

An Honest Assessment

One of the most difficult things to analyze in law enforcement is an after-action assessment of what went right, what went wrong and how we can learn from it after a critical incident. The first step is to be honest about what happened. Life is not perfect in anyone’s world, but that is no more evident than in the imperfect world of policing. If we could script it ahead of time like on TV, then we would be perfect every episode. But we don’t get to script what happens in our world. Often we are dealt a bag of crap and we are expected to make it taste good.

Police operate in a realm of uncertainty. Officers in exigent circumstances have to cobble together incomplete bits and pieces of information to decide an appropriate course of action, and do it fast. Then it gets reviewed in slow motion by people who were not there. They get time to examine every moment frame by frame in the safe space of a conference room. Let’s be honest. Their conclusions are arrived at in a second-guessing environment with all of the information handed to them, not just bits and pieces.

I am prefacing the observations I have following the horrific mass murder of 19 children and 3 teachers at a Uvalde, Texas school for a reason. It’s because no matter how many times an incident like this occurs, the reaction following it turns into the same ritual. We do the same thing. We go from shock and horror at what just happened, memorials and GoFundMe pages get set up and that is understandably appropriate. The next phase involves politicians using it for face time, fundraising for their campaign, to virtue signal and maybe score some cheap political points off the backs of the dead and their survivors. The third phase of the ritual is that people start looking for someone to blame for the incident. Attempts are made usually by the media and other agenda driven people. Somebody has to be blame for this other than the perpetrators themselves. And what better entity to hyper-analyze than the law enforcement response.

I am very familiar with what occurs in the early moments of critical events like this: mass confusion and pandemonium. There is little information available, and in many cases partial information. The media monitors police call scanners so sometimes they beat police there and want something said. They’ll settle for anything. New information continues to roll in as the incident unfolds. I get it. But unlike many people including current and retired law enforcement officials who blurt out comments without knowing all the facts and information that undermine law enforcement, I won’t do that. I’ll take a different approach.

Life is not perfect. Neither are law enforcement officers. That scene at that Uvalde school was an old-fashioned cluster-you know what. Hint, it rhymes with suck. Nothing that was happening was in law enforcement’s favor to aid their decision-making. It is reported that a door at the school that was supposed to be locked was propped open. A high-ranking officer at the scene is reported to have made a command decision that it was no longer an active shooter but a barricaded subject as the shooting was still going on. Those two situations, active shooter and barricaded subject would involve a very different response. Sometimes all you have to work with ends up as a best guess. But decisions still have to be made in exigency nonetheless.

In these events, information rapidly evolves. I know from experience that often the first so-called facts coming through are those most subject to change. The military refers to it as the fog of war. That phrase is defined as the uncertainty in situational awareness experienced by participants in military operations. You simply don’t know. Look, I still don’t know what to believe with all the reported events in the media, two weeks after the Uvalde shooting happened. Some reports said officers delayed entry for an hour

while waiting for equipment. Other reports had officers going in immediately. I don’t know, but at this point that is irrelevant. What is relevant is what does law enforcement do going forward. In more specific terms, the question this profession has to ask themselves is what can they do better in the future to influence a different outcome, a better outcome that instills confidence in the public that we can do this and that we can be counted on. Let’s face it, this was not our finest hour as a profession. We need to publicly admit it. The public doesn’t expect perfection from us. They do and should demand a level of excellence from us if we want to be considered a profession. That is what professionals do. They expect more of themselves. It’s a behavior issue.

From a technical issue, there is this. As sheriff of one of the 50 largest sheriff’s offices in the country and a state of Wisconsin certified law enforcement training center, I always had this complaint about our training. Too much of it occurs in controlled static and sterile environments. I don’t know how to create real life chaos and pandemonium, but those two elements change things. Tabletop exercises are done in a controlled environment. Additionally, we too often fall into the trap of preparing for the last event. School buildings have not changed much. One of the most notables that set the stage for active shooter incidents in the last half-century occurred at Columbine High School in Colorado in 1997. Police were criticized for a slow response to that active shooter. They were staging and waiting for equipment as the shooting was going on. That was nearly 25 years ago and here we are again. The questionable police response issue reared its ugly head again during the Parkland, Florida High School shooting a few years ago and here we are dealing with the same criticism about the school shooting in Uvalde. We are better than this, and it’s time we show it at these incidents.

In critical incidents, time is not always on your side. If the shooting is still underway, it’s go time. You don’t always have time for the static response of setting up a command post, implementing the incident command system (ICS) and waiting for more resources to arrive. A rapid response is required. Look at how first responders of the NYPD and NYFD performed during the attacks on the World Trade Center on Sept 11, 2001. They rushed into a burning building. They instinctively put themselves in harm’s way to evacuate people out of those towers. They didn’t have time to neatly set everything up first or think about their own safety. Then the buildings collapsed, trapping them inside and killing hundreds of first responders. They epitomized selflessness.

In these active school shooters, we are expected to immediately rush in, locate and confront the shooter whether we have all the equipment and personnel we need or not. The objective is to have the shooter turn from shooting teachers and children and turn his sights on shooting at law enforcement officers instead. They are at least armed and have a better chance at surviving than unarmed kids and teachers. Is that gut wrenching? Hell yes, it is. One’s fear cannot override their duty to perform. I am not suggesting it’s easy, but it is what we signed up for. How often is that conversation had at training sessions?

Yes, this is hard stuff, but this conversation must be had internally. We have to do some soul searching here. Otherwise, we will be dealing with another black eye on this profession like the one the Uvalde tragedy gave us.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

NYC Mayor Eric Adams: Failing Upward?

By: Joel E. Gordon

He ran on being a veteran police executive. While there were those with high hopes that a former police official being elected as mayor of America's largest city would result in positive progress on crime rates and stimulate positive progress in a city on the decline, those with insider knowledge correctly thought otherwise. Now the New York City mayor is reportedly exploring a possible presidential run in 2024?

New York City crime is way up since DeBlasio left. Reportedly up by 65% on subways and 43% overall.Perhaps more people should have paid attention to clues that Eric Adams was not the answer to the city’s crime problems.

An example is the summer 2020 incident where a Brooklyn woman followed then-Borough President Eric Adams’ advice for New Yorkers to settle disputes neighbor-to-neighbor rather than calling 911 and was shot dead after she followed Adams advice and confronted some neighborhood hooligans setting off illegal fireworks. Adams had said people should talk to their neighbors about the “nonviolent act,” rather than call the authorities and risk a “heavy-handed” police response.

What?

Now this … Mayor Adams recently publicly stated that he is tired of seeing NYPD officers on their phones at subway stations — and is asking New Yorkers to snap a picture when they see it happening,.“You walk downstairs, you see five transit officers standing at the booth looking at their phones.” “If you see it, send me a picture. Let me know,” he said, “because I’ll go to that district the next day and see exactly what’s happening.” “Send me a shot. New Yorkers, you see that, send me a photo and I will be at that station.”

Fortunately, Pat Lynch and the PBA are speaking up as Adams is seemingly uninformed and mistaken again. Selling out the officers when frequently the officers are looking at their department-issued smartphone as a result of being ordered to use them on official business; Lynch suggested perhaps NYPD management might as well go back to pen and paper resulting in longer response times and lack of officers to help. Having the public make officer complaints by snapping pictures sets up unnecessary confrontations and unwarranted feelings of ill will.

So, Mayor Adams has now called a meeting with the NYPD’s commanding officers to solicit ideas, three plans each to reduce crime in their patrol areas, about combating soaring crime ahead of the historically heightened violent crime summer months.

Adams has also requested statistics on crime, summonses, homeless encampment clearings and Civilian Complaint Review Board cases, as well as information on each command’s integrity control officer. “I have a major meeting with all of my commanders,” he said. “We’re going to sit down for several hours to get our summer plan in order, as well as think how we deploy police.”

But not everyone is taking it seriously. One source with knowledge of the meeting quipped that commanders think bringing ideas to combat crime is a “joke” according to a report in the New York Post newspaper.

In a recent interview, Mayor Adams unequivocally stated that city employees who were fired for being unvaccinated will never get their jobs back. This nonsensical policy will further contribute to the permanent loss of highly trained and valuable employees and investigators.

It is clear that Mayor Adams is no fan of many of his former police colleagues and likewise they not of him. Are New Yorkers pleased with Adams’ performance? As former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has asked “When does the honeymoon end?” Likely it is already rapidly waning.

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com