KABOOM! How Does Someone This Ignorant Of The Law Rise To This Level Of Law Enforcement?

Oh, fine. I get up, still groggy, from a perfectly lovely nap, my defenses are down, I’m still savoring that dream where Mookie Betts, Chester A. Arthur and Danny Kaye drop by with some macaroons, and what is the first thing I read?



There goes my head, all over my office and this transcript I have to read in ten minute increments because it’s so boring. Oh, thank you, thank you so much, City of Seattle and your  ridiculous Chief of Police, Carmen Best!

What’s “this” you ask? Well, let me get one of those jumbo rolls of Bounty I’m keeping in the trunk of my car, and wipe off the keyboard—there.  Now you can read this too, but watch your head…

In a regular video feature called “Chief’s Brief”—see how they sucked me in with a harmless-looking screen?

—The Chief of Police introduced a local journalist who briefly spoke abut the importance of reporting ” hate crimes.” Usually that topic would put my head on full alert, but the yumminess of those dream macaroons were still on my mind, so I wasn’t ready when the Chief came back on the screen and said,

“We will document and investigate every reported hate crime Even racist name-calling should be reported to police. If you aren’t sure if a hate crime occurred, call 911. We are here to help.”

No, you are apparently there to misinform the Seattle area about what constitutes a hate crime and what the First Amendment means. Incredibly, this video was seen by the journalist, Lori Matsukawa, the technicians who helped record it, and probably Best’s superiors, and nobody had adequate ethics alarms, or a sufficient high school education, to speak up and say, “Uh, Chief? You can’t tell people to call 911 to report what they think constitutes “racist name-calling.” Name-calling, any kind of name calling, is not against the law, and cannot be against the law. That’s a pure, uncontroversial, First Amendment protection.”

Unfortunately, I might add, “And incidentally, what’s the matter with you? Didn’t they teach you about the First Amendment in your police training? Don’t you know the limitations on what the police can  and can’t control? I see in your bio that you graduated from Lincoln High School in Tacoma, 1983 and  attended Eastern Washington University until you  joined the United States Army. Eventually, you got undergraduate degree from Western Illinois University. You graduated from  the police academy. You received a certificate in police management from the University of Washington, a Master’s in Criminal Justice from Northeastern University, completed  the FBI National Academy, the Criminal Justice Executive Leadership Academy, and the Senior Management Institute for Police. You have served in the  Seattle Police Department for 26 years , and with all that, you never read the Bill of Rights, or learned the basic fact of life in the United States that the government can not and must not tell citizens what they can and cannot say, which is what announcing that it is appropriate to call 911 when someone thinks another citizen has engaged in name-calling?

The Washington Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union is obligated, now, to publicly rebuke the Chief, as are the editors of every Seattle publication. Then there should he an investigtaion of all the institutions that passed best along to her current position, to determine how it is even possible that someone could rise to Chief of Police of a major metropolis either so ignorant of this basic principle of U.S. law, or so willing to defy it.


Pointer: Reason


20 thoughts on “KABOOM! How Does Someone This Ignorant Of The Law Rise To This Level Of Law Enforcement?

  1. Affirmative action at its finest. No one will dare rebuke her, because she is a black female and to do so would be career/personal suicide.

    • I was wondering if someone would call 911 on a critic who called the Chief an ignoramus, and if that would be viewed as “racist name-calling,” as in calling an African American an uncomplimentary name. That was the standard encouraged by Democrats during the Obama administration.

  2. One word: politics. It’s an appointed position, and you don’t have to necessarily be the best of the best to occupy it. She’s a black woman, though, so she’s beyond criticism.

  3. “But if we don’t make being prejudiced against the law, how do we get people to stop being racists?”

    “…Are you telling me that the only way you know how to solve social problems is with laws? No wonder your political system is a mess.”

  4. My concern goes out to the unfortunate individual who really has an actual emergency. Imagine a life hanging in the balance and time being of the essence. However, you’re on hold because the 911 operator is tied up listening to Gladys Cravitts going on and on about her name-calling tale of woe. Someone will end up dead because some insecure snowflake got their feelings hurt.

    • I completely missed that! I didn’t see that she told people to call 911 if they feel an insult might be tinged with hatred or racial bias. Now my head exploded. That’s not what 911 is for, and she should be fired immediately for using her position to encourage people to dial 911 for non-emergencies.

      “If you aren’t sure if a hate crime occurred, call 911.” If you aren’t sure if a hate crime occurred, don’t call 911 because it’s not a fhtagn emergency. Even actual crimes aren’t always emergencies.

      911 calls should not sound like comedy sketches. “911, what’s your emergency?” “Somebody called me a nasty name, and I think it might have a history as a racial slur. Can you please look it up?” “…Is anyone injured or in danger?” “No, but–” “This number is for emergencies only. If you call again about this issue or anything like it you will be prosecuted.” *click*

      There’s something wrong with human group dynamics, or people of authority wouldn’t be this stupid.

  5. Eastern Washington U.
    Western Illinois U.
    University of Washington
    Northeastern U.
    US Army
    FBI Academy

    She is just doing what she was taught at all of those institutions. Not one of those institutions thinks the First Amendment is valid or that it covers ‘hate speech’. With such a pedigree, she would have to have quite a bit of willpower and individualism to believe anything else. If she had such willpower and individualism, she would not have succeeded in those institutions.

    • No one wants to be the one to be seen as defending racial slurs. It’s that simple.

      People still don’t appreciate the extent that wokeness influences (and ruins) important policy decisions and institutions.

  6. When the President visits Seattle and the large body of instant and reflexive protestors show up and call him a White Supremacist, which is a safe bet they will, will the Chief send out her hate-crime fighters to arrest the protestors committing the Constitutionally protected and horrific crime of name-calling…I think not.

    This is simply criminalizing speech which may offend or may be found disagreeable by the professionally offended and victim class. As long the speech offends the preordained victim status group or groups, then, and only then, is it a crime.

    This is the country these Alinskyites want to create. Outlawing anything with which they disagree and supporting its suppression with the authority of the state is their goal. The result is official oppression.

  7. This while Seattle and other such cities institute policies to basically ignore actual crimes because “coronavirus”.

    From a Mother Jones article ( https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2020/03/coronavirus-jails-bail-reform-arrests/ )
    “In Seattle, while police have not been officially instructed to send fewer people to the county jail, officers have “a lot of discretion” in who they book for low-level crimes, Seattle PD Sgt. Sean Whitcomb says—especially if the person being arrested appears sick. “If it’s a serious enough crime—gun violence, for instance—we have the capacity to guard them, and we can do so in a way that’s safe for us,” Whitcomb says. “But if someone just shoplifted a T-shirt, or didn’t pay for their lunch at a restaurant, these are things that we could just take a report and refer it to the prosecutor’s office for future filing consideration.”

  8. She made this concurrent with the announcement that anything but the most serious life threatening calls won’t get an response from an officer in person to reduce the risk of spreading the Xi Jinping virus.

    This doesn’t rise to the level of Italian politicians hugging a Chinese person, but it’s darn close.

    • My immediate reaction to Italy’s “hug a Chinese person day” was that it was still foolish because it was still based on racial prejudice. My delayed reaction is, “Wait, do they secretly want Chinese people to get sick?”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.