In the wake of the Ferguson Riots in both August and November of 2014, Attorney General Eric Holder is calling for the federal government to put an end to racial profiling. Critics call the move an attempt by the federal government to stoke the fires of racial division. House Democrats pulling a "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" move on the floor of the House piles on the left's fanning of the flames. Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke criticized the federal government, as well as local leadership, regarding the handling of Ferguson, calling the rioters "anarchists," and saying that political leadership is only making matters worse. Gun Owners of America President Larry Pratt states the federal government is using Ferguson as yet another excuse to go after gun ownership.
The question for many, as Holder calls for more federal involvement, is whether or not the federal government even has any authority to be involving itself in local issues, regardless of local say. The quick answer, when referring to the authorities granted by the United States Constitution, is a very stern "NO."
Like any issue, racial profiling has many faces. Should cops target certain groups for the sake of harassment because of their color, ethnicity, or religious affiliation? Of course not. But should law enforcement pay special attention to individuals that are members of groups that statistically dominate criminal activity, or societal unrest? Absolutely. Profiling, to a certain degree, is necessary, and unavoidable. The problem is, in the name of fairness, we are actually placed in greater danger, when "politically correct" rules against profiling are put into place because during the process certain groups become considered protected, and then receive the opposite attention they should be getting.
Local law enforcement understands the need for certain strategies. Those strategies may include some form of profiling, more than the federal government says it is willing to allow. For the federal government to be visiting with local law enforcement to "guide" them towards moving away from any form of profiling is not only unconstitutional, but will serve to handcuff local law enforcement, and will encourage more violence because certain groups will work to take advantage of the limitations on law enforcement.
I am not suggesting that members of certain groups should be harassed by police indiscriminately. Of course there should be care, and reasonable consideration. But if the problem in a neighborhood, for example, statistically shows that there are particular members of the community, wearing perhaps a certain gang color, or exhibiting a certain attitude, that are more likely to be a problem, law enforcement must be aware, and attentive regarding those realities, and use those observations to act as reasonably necessary.
In the end, what we are seeing is yet another infringement on local authority, and State Sovereignty, by a federal government carrying out an agenda that includes expanding their realm of powers, while doing so in the name of peace and safety.
What the Obama administration is doing is in line with what Rahm Emanuel said from the very beginning, "You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Eric Holder's Speech on New Racial Profiling Guidelines Interrupted by Protesters, but his response gets a standing ovation - The Blaze
Holder: New Policy Will Help End Racial Profiling - CBS News
Sheriff David Clarke on Ferguson Response: Gov. Nixon "Afraid of Getting Criticized" - Right Wisconsin
Pratt: Feds Using Ferguson riot fears to clamp down on gun rights - Human Events
Eric Holder: We must seize the unique opportunity - Breitbart
Lawmakers make hands up gesture on House Floor - Politico
Holder says New Justice Department Policy will End Racial Profiling - CBS Atlanta
Black Sheriff: Political Leadership Stoked Ferguson Riots - NewsMax
No comments:
Post a Comment