Over at NH Journal, Michael Graham asks the actual question I answered: “Will NH Pols Meet BLM Demands?”
My answer is “only if they are scared of their own shadows“. This is yet another ploy by an extremely small group of people trying to shove their way forward on the political surfboard based on the BLM / Antifa riots. They had a bit of an actual meaning with the actual peaceful protests but when they went all violence / destruction, this movement should now be shunned BECAUSE it no longer reflects, IMHO, what it was in the beginning. It has morphed from being an actual cause to look into racial equality and putting a Big Flashlight on bad apple cops to being an in your face of how DARE you stand against us – here’s my brick to your window and your face. Doubt me? Go ahead, change my mind as I play clips of the riots behind me.
Look, this isn’t Black vs White (or anyone else). These demands should be looked at as a “cry from an oppressed minority” either. This should be viewed for what it is – a small political group that is opportunity chasing current events to put themselves in charge. Yes, it IS political – this is not about “human rights” (which has also become as much as a catch-all phrase as “Reagan’s 80% Rule on the Right).
Here’s my expectations / observations of these demands (listed below):
- These are now just opportunistic. Punching well above their weight class (see below) using the fear of “you’re a racist” epithet as a political cudgel.
- Are just more of an overreach of a movement that has become more of a “burn it to the ground” (actual words, by the way, from them) anti-American bent whose only end is to further splinter / deconstruct / eliminate the E Pluribus Unum motto.
- Progressives politicians who are scared out of their minds of this extremely militant part of their Identity Group Politics Totem Pole that has taken up violence and “…shame if something were to happen to it” attitude. They will go Full Monty and fall on their knees to prove that they are “down with the struggle” mostly because they fear their own supporters turning on them if they either don’t or even address them. These are the ones these demands are targeting.
- This issuance of all these demands is merely the application of Alinsky’s Rule #1 in full view:
RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood.
In this case, votes and bad PR (leading to less votes from those that don’t follow the politics of this like activists do). Black Lives Matter Seacoast are hoping that they won’t be seen, here in NH, as the political version of the Wild Western town facade in movies. Or, if you prefer, “all hat and no cattle”. Seriously, how many actual votes do they have to get ANY of their demands done? And why should be allow racist Critical Race Theory to grab a hold point here in NH?
- There are few that could be implemented. After all, anything NOT at the State level is a mere subdivision of the State of NH and in our system, not allowed to do ANYTHING unless there an RSA that allows them any leeway for these actions at all.
- There will be a push for Republicans to do move on them. My advice, worth every penny they aren’t paying me, is to ignore them.
- Frankly, this is an experiment in or of the Tyranny of the Minority. Would GraniteGrok get any reasonable results if we put out a list of Conservative based “demands” of what we want (hmm, perhaps the subject of another post just because, well, the thought amuses me).
- That some folks that have much more than two brain cells to rub together will look at them and go “some have Constitutional problems” and some of this is nothing but “propaganda” and an effort to force “re-education” on folks just like the Maoist Cultural Revolution (hoping that nobody will know what that is).
Here’s the demands and a few notes by me
All Candidates for State Legislature
● We demand legislation that removes qualified immunity for all law enforcement officials.
With no safety mechanisms for bad actors using what would now be a large hole? Yes, Q.I. is a shield for all kinds of “public officials” – let’s take it away for ALL and not just police if that’s what your intent is. Now, see how many would actually be willing to server?
● We demand legislation that legalizes the use and possession of cannabis and the retroactive application to all prior convictions and automatic expungement for current and prior
convictions.
No. You did what was a crime at the time, serve it. Decisions have consequences – live with them.
● We demand legislation that requires law enforcement agencies to gather, analyze and make available to the public, at least annually, data on demographics (including, at a minimum, gender and race) for arrests, citations and motor vehicle and subject stops regardless of disposition.
● We demand legislation that requires law enforcement agencies to gather, analyze, and make available to the public, at least annually, data on demographics (including, at a minimum, gender and race) of all people subject to any kind of search (frisk, container search, car or house, etc.) and the legal justification for the search.
More paper work. Worse, more of the same dividing people up by any other metric your want. I want cops out there policing and not just paper pushers. Yes, stats are good and some are necessary. But where does it stop in furthering a political agenda?
● We demand legislation that establishes the training requirements of part time officers to match the training of full time officers or limiting the abilities and actions of part time officers.
● We demand legislation that suspends the use of paid administrative leave for police under investigation for excessive force.
For that last one, what ever happened to your minds that people are considered to be innocent and must be proven guilty. Y’all are demanding that they are guilty AND penalized before adjudication. That’s WRONG!
● We demand legislation that withholds pensions from officers involved in use of excessive force, and don’t allow officers who have been documented for use of excessive force to be re hired in NH.
So perhaps a one time event can negate an entire career history of perfect behavior by taking away their pensions? That’s wrong. Ditto for the second. THAT said, if there is a definable pattern of the willful use of force when not needed, I might be more apt to agree.
● We demand legislation that requires law enforcement to be liable for misconduct settlements instead of the taxpayers of the town/city.
You realize that you’ll end up with the results that are now being seen in cities that are implementing “Defund the police” because this could be the same thing but from the opposite side. Look at Minneapolis – the City Council is now upset that crime is up now that police are implementing the “Baltimore Syndrome” while on duty and leaving the force.
How will you deal with the future instances of The Law of Unintended Consequences with this demand (and the others).
You’re DEMANDING without thinking through what you want (or is that the intent behind this all)?
● We demand legislation that enacts all recommendations made by the LEACT commission to be implemented.
● We demand legislation that requires a code of civil conduct for all elected officials wherein consequences are censored at minimum and removal from office for egregious conduct.
Yeah, that ain’t happening – that was tried on me by the former Town Administrator and Finance Director that hated my outspokenness about what was going on. And one person exercising their First Amendment Rights; we now see your meme of “If you aren’t Anti-Racist you ARE racist” going around. If I refused to sign onto that (which is both coerced speech and thought), would it be considered “egregious”? I’m betting that some “offended SJW / BLM / Antifa / Democrat-with-a-grudge” would see it that way.
All Candidates for County Attorney
● We demand annual training hosted by a Black Lives Matter Seacoast recognized trainer, of all prosecutors on implicit bias, personal and interpersonal racism, systemic racism and anti-racism.
Ah! More Propaganda! Or, if you prefer – re-education camps.
● We demand that prosecutors consider the likely impact of racism and implicit bias on Black people and other people of color who have been brought into the criminal justice system in determining a fair sentence.
So now you want extra-legislative items involved in a legal process? NO! Everyone needs to be judged on the merits of each case – there’s a reason why Lady Justice has a blindfold and you want to rip it off. Guess what, can the rest of us start demanding other things as well?
No, we shouldn’t and neither should you. Go and stop being lazy – pass the legislation to make that happen. See what kind of pushback you get.
● We demand that prosecutors report to police agencies when a judge has ruled that an officer has acted unconstitutionally, when the prosecutor has formed that legal conclusion, or when the prosecutor has a reason to suspect the officer’s actions were impacted by explicit or implicit bias.
I’ll agree to a judge making that determination; the rest of it is just current political gobbeldy-gook thrown around hoping to stick to the wall. And again, I’m so tired with “bias” being so tossed around so blithely to cover everything. It all comes down to the clubs that the Left is now assuming EVERYONE is guilty of: White Guilt, White Supremacy, unconscious racism – all things that are vehemently assumed to be true simply by being a Person of Pallor. THAT’S WRONG! That’s just reverse racism, which really is a thing.
Just replay what has been said for years now by the Left – white, middle aged, Evangelical men are responsible for EVERYTHING wrong! I’m sick of being judged because of an immutable attribute of my being. You demand that everyone else not judge you by the color of your skin – then be intellectually honest for others.
But, then again, that’s what the Marxist derived Critical Race Theory has brought to us – and seemingly embraced by this group. Go ahead, change my mind.
All Candidates for Sheriff and Current Police Chiefs
● We demand that officers should be required to complete at least 20 hours of community service a month in the town/city that they patrol.
Oh, working for free as an article of being employed? I’ll go there – what is the word used when someone demands that someone else does work for free to serve them? Didn’t we fight a war to stop that?
● We demand a heightened focus on preservation of life and treating citizens with respect as founding principles of police culture in the law enforcement department.
As opposed to the reality you’re trying to foist on the rest of us, I am sure that the vast majority of police actually follow this. You’re trying to do politics again.
● We demand full support and the usage of diversion programs as alternatives of arresting individuals with mental health or drug issues.
● We demand the full support of body cam usage and a transparent body cam review process in every police department.
● We demand an investment into having a racial, gender, and sexual orientation diverse police force in each law enforcement department.
I’m getting so tired of this Leftist insistence on splitting us up and forcing us into accepting their Totem Pole by default. This furthers that – which I reject. A person is a person and I don’t consider any of that – until they decide to force it on me. This should be rejected here in NH. We haven’t had the mass violations that perhaps has happened elsewhere – let it go here in NH.
● We demand the research and implementation of programs for law enforcement that for certain calls, social workers or other non-police professionals, are the responders and not law
enforcement. (i.e. CAHOOT of Eugene, OR & STAR of Denver, CO)
Our tiny town doesn’t have the resources to do this. We aren’t Eugene, Denver, NYC, Boston, Minneapolis in size or population. You’re again trying to make a “one-size-fits-all” onto a State and towns that are no ways the same. This is just a herd mentality outlook trying to get its own way.
● We demand that police officers’ social media postings are monitored for threatening or potentially violent posts.
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY TOTALITARIAN in nature – do you really want to implement this as a Proper Role of Government? Remember, once given such Power, it can be turned against you as well – should it? Can we start doing it with teachers that are propagandizing our children? It’s not much of a stretch to do so – after all, there are Districts that ARE monitoring what students are doing online.
You willing to give ME access to ALL of your social media? And then I can post them all up here?
All Candidates for Mayor, Town Councils or Board of Aldermen/Selectman
● We demand investment into social services, such as homelessness, substance use, mental health and domestic violence treatment facilities.
As a former BudComm member, that’s a non-starter. You want that? Then stop being lazy and form charities / NGOs and do the hard work of getting like minded people to pitch in and fund it yourself. Turning to Government FIRST as a response is not the traditional NH way of doing things. You prove your Socialists bent by changing this. Answer is NO!
● We demand a detailed, annual, specific spending report for police expenses to be made available to the public.
It’s called “a Budget” and is done once a year. Further, at least our town posts those expenses up on our website. This is GREAT to see that you have failed to do your homework! Answer is NO!
● We demand the establishment of a civilian review board to oversee local policing.
We already have that – it’s called the Selectboard in towns and City Councils in our cities. You vote the members in and they are responsible. What YOU want is just an appointed board that can be manipulated by political activists. Answer is NO!
● We demand banning the possible use of tear gas and rubber bullets in the respective town/city.
What, so that your BLM/Antifa rioters can have an easier time of, well, destroying our towns and cities? Remember, the insurance costs, nationally are at $2 Billion and still rising. And that doesn’t cover all the costs, either. Tell you what, buckos, you ante up the money to replace what YOUR folks have already burnt to the ground (Minneapolis is already over $500 million).
How about this – WE demand FIRST that your people act normal and within regular social means. Do that first and we’ll talk. Otherwise, the Answer is NO!
● We demand that the implementation a policy called Recall in which the eligible voters of town/city have the ability, by petition, to demand the removal of an elected official.
We’re not a home rule state nor a petition based State. You know that – why do you want to change NH to be like other States? Why aren’t you willing to wait the year or two and just vote them out of office?
