Will Our Leaders Have What it Takes to Prevent Mass Chaos This Time Around?

Plus legislative updates and a resource for police families

Seattle area journalist Jason Rantz penned an astute article comparing the demonstrations at Columbia University in New York City this past week to the havoc of 2020. He writes that,

“New York Police arrested more than 100 activists, many of whom screamed (like) children as they were being carted off. They wanted to be arrested. These are professional social justice martyrs searching for meaning in their empty lives.”

Not only did arresting the demonstrators seemingly not act as a deterrent, but as Jason explained, it seemed to motivate them. This may help explain at least part of it.

“And, as was the case with BLM and Antifa radicals who formed the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ), they were romanticized by some in the media.”

Jason is also correct when he states that the way leaders react in coming days will be critical in determining future outcomes.

“These radical activists will likely test police and lawmakers in the next week . . Activists want to see if law enforcement is allowed to make more arrests. If not, the activists will feel emboldened and continue their protests, while recruiting new members to their cause.”

It’s not a difficult concept: appeasing lawlessness only begets more lawlessness. If the adults in the room don’t say No! this time around, it’s not a stretch to think that it would open the door to another summer of 2020. And given the fact that the blue line has been severely tattered since then, this scenario would be catastrophic.

This is the United States of America. We shouldn’t have to live in fear that the other shoe may drop at any moment.

Legislative Updates!

The Safe and Open Streets Act (H.R. 6926 / S. 3492)

This bill, which would make it a federal crime to intentionally obstruct or attempt to obstruct a public road, gained eight new House co-sponsors this past week.

Rep. Troy Nehls (TX-22)

Rep. Daniel Meuser (PA-9)

Rep. Troy Balderson (OH-12)

Rep. Ronny Jackson (TX-13)

Rep. Anthon D’Esposito (NY-4)

Rep. Mark Alford (MO-4)

Rep. Byron Donalds (FL-19)

Rep. Russell Fry (SC-7)

These signatures come on the heels of the rise in demonstrations (which have included blocking roads) we’ve been witnessing. The bill is also gaining co-sponsors because you are taking the time to lobby your elected representatives! Please keep contacting your federal legislators!

Placing lives at risk and impeding people from getting to work or to their appointments so that a few can impose a worldview on to the rest of us, is not protected speech. Every federal legislator should be on board with this bill.

Pennsylvania Police Legislation Needs to Go Further

This past week, the Pennsylvania House adopted a resolution to honor those Commonwealth police officers who lost their lives in the line of duty. (My presser for National Police Association is here.) It’s a thoughtful way to acknowledge the critical role officers play in keeping communities safe. At the very least, every state should adopt a similar resolution.

The Pennsylvania legislature also considered four bills last year that would do things like require officers to partner up in critical crime areas (not always logistically feasible with an ongoing staffing shortage) and invest in crime-fighting technology.

At least someone is doing something, and I suppose something is better than nothing. That said, these bills don’t go nearly far enough or get to the crux of why officers are being shot, attacked, and harassed in greater numbers.

We know that those who harm police officers often times have a criminal record. We’ve also seen district attorneys who refuse to prosecute and judges who show leniency for offenders who’ve committed egregious crimes.

Until this aspect of the criminal justice equation is addressed, bills like those introduced by the Pennsylvania House last year won’t make a difference in reducing these tragic officer deaths.

Resource for Police Officers and Their Families

While reading an article by

Roland Clee

of American Peace Officer, I learned of a little-known U.S Department of Justice program benefit available to the loved ones of police officers who lost their lives or were injured while in the line of duty.

Roland writes,

“This is a fund that pays out death benefits of approximately $430,000 to the survivors when an officer has a line of duty death. Few people, myself included, knew that this is a benefit for officers who suffer a catastrophic on-duty injury. Many don’t even hear about the program until the three-year deadline has passed. This benefit doesn’t even have a local fiscal impact but many command staffs don’t even know that this applies to injuries. The Wounded Blue has helped about a thousand officers and their families seek this compensation, many successfully, from the federal government.”

This is the first I’ve heard about this program, so I know very little about it, aside from what I read in Roland’s article and on the D.O.J. website. It looks like something worth investigating.

In the News

A Terrorist Warning from the FBI

With all the stories and issues demanding our attention, it’s easy to miss things. You’d think, though, that something as critical as a potential terrorist threat, would be top-of-the hour news.

I just happened to stumble on this article from the Wall Street Journal (dated April 11) because their editorial board had recirculated it on the front page the other day.

Here are some excerpts . . .

“As I look back over my career in law enforcement, I would be hard-pressed to think of a time where so many threats to our public safety and national security were so elevated all at once,” Mr. Wray told lawmakers. “But that is the case as I sit here today.””

“. . . Of increasing concern “is the potential for a coordinated attack here in the homeland, akin to the ISIS-K attack we saw at the Russia concert hall just a couple weeks ago,” Mr. Wray testified. ISIS-K never went away but it now has a sanctuary in Afghanistan from which it planned the Moscow strike and one in January in Iran. European governments have been fortunate to stop others.

“The world’s jihadists can also see that the U.S. southern border is essentially open if they want to make the trek.”

All one needs to do is look at the conflicts in the Middle East, the recent ISIS attack on Russia, the border crisis (where a reported 600,000 migrants with criminal records are now at large in our country), and the growing anti-American sentiment on our own soil, to see that these threats are credible.

We live at a point in time when the truth is of little consequence, where facts are dismissed as propaganda and numbers are manipulated to manufacture personal narratives. A parasitic mind virus, the term popularized by professor and author Gad Saad, has infected all of our major institutions.

Social media’s influence is especially insidious. These platforms are not only designed to be addictive; their engineers have perfected the science of designing algorithms that confirm our biases and fuel our rage. Even genuine well-meaning people with integrity, who by way of being human, can get caught in the fray.

This has made it difficult to know what or whom to believe anymore. It’s tragic . . . because we can’t make sound decisions for ourselves and our country if our solutions are based on narratives and lies.

It’s why it’s never been as important as it is now to question everything. Before accepting something as fact, I go through a process that looks something like this: Does what that person said even make sense? If it doesn’t make sense, is it because the theory is flawed or is it something that I just haven’t considered yet? Does it align with what I already know to be true? Was that questionable statement taken out of context? Who’s peddling the information, what is their history, and what do they gain by their statements and actions?

The end goal should always be to arrive at the truth. Without it, we’re just fooling ourselves.

Let me know what you’re thinking, and stay safe and well. : )

---

For the Blue is a solutions-based initiative. I’m just an American patriot asking questions. I don’t work with any political party and I answer to nobody. For me, the health of the nation, due process (including for police officers), the rule of law, and respect for individual liberties, will always transcend party affiliation. I welcome your thoughts, even if you disagree; though personal attacks will be ignored. You can reach me at fortheblue@substack.com.