Thursday, September 29, 2016

BLM in the USA and 'refugees' in Sweden - something in common?

I find it more than a little ironic that Sweden - a nation that prides itself on opening its doors to 'refugees' - is now fighting an epidemic of lawlessness caused by those same refugees.

The inflow of asylum seekers in Sweden, a country with one of the most liberal laws towards refugees, is putting an increasing strain on the country's police. There are now reportedly 55 areas in the country, where the law is not fully upheld.

The number has risen from 50 in February, when the police last gave a comprehensive report on the issue, and last week, when the law enforcement agency gave an update. According to media reports, the service is facing a major crisis of self-confidence, with as many as three officers on average asking to resign on a daily basis. Internal polls say four officers out of five have been considering a change of profession lately.

“We have a major crisis. Many colleagues are choosing to quit,” police officer Peter Larsson told the Norwegian broadcaster NRK. “A drastically worsened working environment means many colleagues are now looking for other work.”

If officers go into a no-go zone, they risk being verbally attacked or pelted with stones. Patrol cars may be set ablaze or stolen.

Crime rates in the blacklisted areas are on the rise, the police report said. The offenses range from vandalism to drug crimes to sex assaults and gun violence.

There's more at the link.

And what happens when police are told not to go into a zone of lawlessness?  Consider Baltimore, 2015:

Despite a firm denial by Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, a senior law enforcement source charges that she gave an order for police to stand down as riots broke out Monday night, raising more questions about whether some of the violence and looting could have been prevented.

The source, who is involved in the enforcement efforts, confirmed to Fox News there was a direct order from the mayor to her police chief Monday night, effectively tying the hands of officers as they were pelted with rocks and bottles.

. . .

On Monday, [Maryland Governor] Hogan suggested the mayor waited too long to request a state of emergency.

That followed criticism over her remarks over the weekend, when she said it's important to give protesters the opportunity to exercise their right to free speech.

She seemed to take that notion a step further: "It's a very delicate balancing act, because, while we tried to make sure that they were protected from the cars and the other things that were going on, we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well."

Again, more at the link.  Bold, underlined text is my emphasis.

Another example?  Sure.  How about Chicago?

Starting Jan. 1, officers were required to fill out the “investigatory stop reports” following changes in the state law and an agreement the Police Department made last year with the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois that required Chicago officers to more thoroughly document their street stops.

The reports have caused controversy within the department because officers have complained they are too time-consuming and confusing to fill out. As a result, street stops made by Chicago police officers have plummeted significantly.

After hearing feedback from officers about new stop reports, interim police Superintendent John Escalante worked with the city’s Law Department and the ACLU to simplify the forms.

The changes, which are being completed and go into effect March 1, will eliminate some redundancies in the reports ... Instead of being two pages, the new stop reports will be reduced to 1 ½ pages, Police Department officials said.

More at the link. Again, bold, underlined text is my emphasis - and, in this case, it looks suspiciously as if the new reporting requirements were designed to achieve that result.  That sure sounds like a disincentive to the police, if you ask me.  "Do your job - then fill out a form that'll take a long time, during which you can't do your job!"

And what about Los Angeles?

Run away. If a police officer is confronted by a suspect with a weapon, those entrusted to set policies for the Police Department believe officers should run away. That’s the recent finding from the Los Angeles Police Commission which has turned Monday morning quarterbacking into a weekly agenda item at the three-ring circus they preside over every Tuesday morning.

. . .

The Commission is becoming nothing more than a politically motivated rubber stamp for the warped worldview of a handful of activists that they pander to. In this instance, only Commissioner Steve Soboroff was willing to let facts and reason prevail.

The message the Los Angeles Police Commission is sending to officers confronted with a violent and dangerous suspect is clear: You can save your life or save your job, but you cannot do both. You choose.

More at the link.

I don't know about you, but I'm seeing left-wing, progressive pressure on police that will inevitably result in precisely the same sort of no-go areas in the USA that Sweden is currently experiencing.  Would anyone deny that measures such as those described above are making it close to impossible for the police to do their jobs?

The next step, of course, is for our law enforcement personnel to realize (as have their colleagues in Sweden) that they're in a no-win situation, and resign en masse.  That will be scary . . . not because the criminals will jump at the chance to do as they please (although they will), but because the broad mass of honest citizens will then stop them the hard way, without worrying about such niceties as legal requirements.  I'm just waiting for that to happen during the next Charlotte, or the next 'flash mob' eruption, or anything like that.  I happen to know that a great many senior law enforcement personnel, in federal, state and local agencies, are seriously worried about precisely the same thing.  You can take that to the bank.  I talked with one of them, a former colleague, just last night.

The USA isn't Sweden.  There, most people have been 'pacified' and are disarmed.  In America . . . not so much.  If the police lose control - or have it taken from them by left-wing, progressive elements - the result is likely to be very nasty indeed.



Y. said...

Sweden has 31 guns per 100 people.

Hunting rifles are plenty deadly. In WWII, 1.5 hits with .30 ball ammo were enough to incapacitate a German or Japanese soldier. Hunting ammunition is, I believe, deadlier.

One or two pissed off old guys firing their hunting rifles into a violent mob in Sweden would cause a lot of damage. And sure, the police could jail them and all that, but what's a life sentence to a 70 year old?

Jonathan H said...

Big cities have been losing officers for years - one reason that few people get speeding tickets in Chicago is that the force is much smaller than it was a decade ago, so the officers have been pulled from looking for speeders to other areas.
I read that during the Ferguson riots, the normally highly visible state highway patrolmen on interstates across the state were nowhere to be seen - they had almost all been pulled in to backstop local officers in the St Louis area.
I wouldn't be surprised to see fewer officers in calm areas as they get pulled towards areas with trouble - but if they aren't allowed to actually do their jobs there, they are more likely to quite, so more officers are pulled in to those areas, who are then more likely to quit themselves - a vicious cycle, if it happens. As the Chinese curse goes "may you live in interesting times".

Anonymous said...

So I am curious; what exactly is "gun violence"?

BigFire said...

Simo Häyhä in the Winter War was able to bag 505 Soviet troops with a Swedish variant of Mosin-Nagant. He didn't get to bag more 1/2 of his face was taken off by an explosive bullet. Strange that for all of his heroism and effectiveness, he only got promoted from corporate to second lieutenant while recovering from his injury.

Inconsiderate Bastard said...

...but because the broad mass of honest citizens will then stop them the hard way, without worrying about such niceties as legal requirements.

And the downside would be.....?

Sow, reap, etc.

A great many people have forgotten the truism that police exist not only to protect the citizens from the criminals but to protect the criminals from the citizens. I do have concerns, but not the same ones you have, Peter; I see no probem with citizens defending their lives, their families, their property and their neighborhoods up to and including the application of necessary lethal force.

My concern is that there is such pent up anger and frustration at what the productive members of society have been subjected to that once begun it will be almost impossible to stop, and that will bring government involvement. Of such things are bloody revolutions made.

JWM said...

We've been raised from early childhood to believe that racial animus flows in only one direction- from bigoted whites to innocent blacks. I can remember getting this message in Sunday school back before 1960. The truth is, most whites don't think about blacks much at all unless they are being robbed, beaten, or raped. Mostly we'd rather just avoid them and let them go about their lives. Black hatred toward whites is active, and vastly deeper than most white folk imagine. It has three toxic components 1) Blacks are told, also from earliest childhood, that they are every bit as smart and capable as whites, that their troubles stem from white racism. 2)The natural and universal tribal mistrust that all men carry. I can recall my niece, a child from a very liberal white father and a chinese mother seeing her first black. (she was maybe two or three) Her response was to spontaneously laugh, bounce up and down, scratch her armpit, and go OOOH OOOH OOOH! in imitation of chimps she saw on TV. 3) The third component is perhaps the worst. It is the hard envy that many people have for those who are richer, smarter, and more successful than themselves. I don't know how many times I've heard otherwise reasonable people make snide bitter comments about "the rich bastards". El Cajon, CA is now getting a taste of BLM. How long before there is an uprising in Los Angeles? I fear this.


Uncle Lar said...

Once you get away from the big cities and venture into the small towns and rural areas of America you find that the citizenry is not all that far removed from the good residents of Northfield Minnesota back in 1876 when the James/Younger gang came to town to make an impromptu withdrawl from the local bank.
I believe the common phrase of the day was, "we shot those boys into doll rags."

Tim Newman said...

The irony is a lot of hipsters and other artsy-type lefties support BLM and the hobbling of the police. But they live in the areas of large cities which are "gentrifying" thanks to the police keeping crime down. I don't think it'll be long before some of these idiots are wailing for the police to come and protect them again.

Rolf said...

The solutions are simple. Some of them are even easy. Some are inexpensive. Peter and others have spelled them out before. They simply require the political will to speak the truth and do the right thing.

Which means, given our current crop of pols, that we are screwed.

Quartermaster said...


Gun violence is possession of any firearm the left doesn't want you to have.

Anonymous said...

"The next step, of course, is for our law enforcement personnel to realize (as have their colleagues in Sweden) that they're in a no-win situation, and resign en masse."

And give up their lavish police benefits? Unemployment in Sweden may pay well, but it doesn't here. They may stop doing their jobs, but they won't stop getting paid for it.


Anonymous said...

Comparing Sweden to pretty much anything is difficult - they do have a martial tradition but have been determined to ignore it since about 1988. (Not earlier.)

Also a country where hunting is a significant hobby, and dangerous big game a concern, at least somewhat. (That "almost tame" musk ox they have as a momentary celebrity isn't safe at all.)

However... it's been centuries since they had any major civil unrest, before this. Be a while before they'll remember how to deal with it.

(Oh, and BigFire, do check your facts please... and not being promoted past 2nd lt without officer training isn't very surprising.)

graylady said...

@ anonymous

You say some pretty obnoxious things for a guy who's afraid to use his name. Cowardice isn't pretty.