Police Refuse to Protect Businesses in Ferguson

frgsnvndlsmIn Ferguson, Missouri, the unthinkable has happened. When the controlling  law enforcement authority (an African-American sworn officer), was directly asked to help protect (predominately white-owned) businesses from looters that who ACTUALLY entering and stealing, vandalizing and ruining their stores (to try to appease and placate black criminals using a the police shooting of another black criminal to commit acts  on white people), THEY WERE TOLD NO.

Let that sink in, the police were standing by just blocks away but refused to enforce the law based on prioritizing the needs and wants of the African-American Community well ahead of the active protection of white businesses. The law enforcement community has taken a huge blow dealt by this one Missouri State Police Captain who has effectively sided with his fellow blacks to condone lawlessness to prevent a possibly negative public view of aggressive law enforcement. 
The pleas for help by shop owners were ignored by police based on them being ordered to meet the needs of the protesters instead of enforcing the law. That is simply unacceptable. Just imagine if white law enforcement leadership told their officers to standfast and not respond to whites attacking black businesses?  The public hue and cry about racism and bigotry would be deafening; instead the white community are supposed to accept the inequity just like we have accepted that blacks have been given BY LAW superior hiring preferences that have resulted in millions of qualified white job candidates, especially white males, unable to find entry-level positions in their choice of careers.
What does that mean? Well it means that law enforcement is not color-blind and has sided preferentially with the African-American community. It means that when times are worst, law enforcement may not be willing to enforce the law based on subjective political pressure. It means my unwavering support of law enforcement has been compromised. It means the theoretical need for the Second Amendment has been proven as citizens were told that if they wanted protection for their homes and businesses, they had to do it themselves. it means that there is no longer a need for debate over the ownership of firearms; it has become a fact that police can and have been politically compromised and any disarming of the population will be based not on actual public need but political design.
What Missouri has taught us;
– Blacks in America can perform acts of violence and lawlessness and fully expect to not be held accountable
– Police, even small-town agencies in American, can be compromised for political gain
– The American rule of law no longer exists for all citizens
– The protection of personal property is up to the owner because just like firefighters who will not enter a structure to fight a fire to protect property, the police have now followed suit.
– Anyone unable or unwilling to protect themselves, their families or their businesses are taking a big and potentially fatal risk.
This event will taint my approach to LE forever.

Comments are closed.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner