Little Love for the NYPD

Posted on by

The New York Times gave editorial space to an NYPD officer who wrote “Why We’re So Mad at de Blasio.” Somehow he managed to blow the opportunity and not provide a reason. The interesting thing are the comments — 1,198 as I write this — which overwhelmingly support Mayor de Blasio. I know it’s not a scientific poll, but if the NYPD are paying attention it might be a shock to them.

13 thoughts on “Little Love for the NYPD”

  1. While the NYPD demands that everyone respect their authority, they don’t show respect to Mayor de Blasio – the person who is their authority, their boss.

    It doesn’t work that way.
    And it won’t work in their favor that way.

    But as I wrote before, this is not the first time the NYPD has acted like this.
    Every time there’s a Mayor in NYC who is to the left of Rudy G – and which one wasn’t? – they do something like this.

  2. Well, the column doesn’t state a reason why they’re so mad at de Blasio, but it does demonstrate the reason: Because they’re dicks.

    It would be one thing if he at least acknowledged what the “anti-police” protests are actually about. But any whining from the NYPD that doesn’t even mention Eric Garner is, yes, “squandering the credibility of the department and reeking of self-pity.”

    By the way, have people in NYC started turning their backs on the cops yet? I know I’d be tempted, but you’d probably get yourself shot that way.

  3. They even did it to Rudy, and that’s after he got into office by supporting a massive police riot.

  4. JDM,
    They revered Rudy!
    A lot of cops act like Fascists, and Benito Guiliani, Il Douche, was an Authoritarian Fascist leader, supreme!

  5. Let’s look at this division between the police and administration (and public) as a problem we can all have a part in solving. Here is what Mr. Osborne’s article tells us and here is a more information about handling a stand-off: http://theweek.com/article/index/260729/6-hostage-negotiation-techniques-that-will-get-you-what-you-want.

    Dear Mr. Osbourne,

    Thank you for presenting your view of the split between the police and the Administration. and your eloquent description of the feelings of a policeman and his family. Though your article is a vivid description of the feelings that motivate you and other policemen, I find that, beneath the emotions you express, I find a way forward for both sides to come together.
    I here would like to separate some of the strands of your article in order to see where it might lead a reader to a better understanding of the situation.
    Here is my take on what you are saying.

    But the killing of Officers Liu and Ramos was a coldblooded assassination.
    First, I have to take exception to your characterization of the deaths of Ramos and Lui. As terrible as the shooting was, it was not a “coldblooded assassination”. It was an act of a mentally unbalanced man who was able to get access to a gun. His motivation to kill police was not based on a reasoned vendetta, but a desire to strike out from the depths of his turmoil, as is shown by his shooting of his ex-girl friend.
    But your extreme reaction, that you place the killings in the most henious light as an assassination, seems puzzling to me. However in your next paragraph you explain the basis for your characterization:
    police feel demonized, demoralized and, at times, literally under assault.
    This is the underlying feeling that you are expressing. It appears that recent events have been a flash point for the expression of these feelings by the police.
    Mr. de Blasio is more than any other public figure in this city responsible for feelings of demoralization among the police.
    It is hard to believe that, in such a short time, the Mayor has been able to demoralize whole police department. You mention two recent examples: his talk with his son and his support of protestors. But these are both words and not actions. They may set off an explosion but the combustable material had to be there. The depth of the feelings that you attribute to the police seem to be of a longer standing. There must be earlier factors that contributed the siege mentality of the department.

    But the time has probably come for the Police Department to ease up on the low-level “broken-windows” stuff while re-evaluating the impact it may or may not have on real, serious crime.
    And here you bring up an issue that you feel has contributed to policemen’s discontent. This is a substansive course of action to improve the situation as viewed by the policemen. Have you or your union brought this option up to the Police Commissioner or Mayor? Has there been any attempt by either side to address the “siege” mentality, or the effect of the “broken window” policing?
    From reading your article, I have gained the impression that there has been long-standing resentment and demoralization in the department, one factor being the “broken window” policing style and these recent protests have been a flash point for the expression of these feelings.
    However, both sides have accepted that this division exists and that is the first step. Both sides need to formulate what the problems are. Trust and respect come from working together. Both sides need to put aside the words and come up with actual problems that can be solved. You don’t like someone’s words, find out why he said them.
    People can’t solve problems by calling each other names: childish, condescending, sulking, disrespectful. The question is why are they so upset that they will say or do these things. A mayor doesn’t try to antagonize his police department for no reason; a police department doesn’t turn their back on their commanders for no reason.
    People don’t command respect; they earn it. What have you done to earn other’s respect?

  6. I left out some quotation marks that indicate Mr. Osborne’s statements. I will correct at the soonest opportunity. Sorry for the confusion.

  7. I hate to say it, but yeah. That was not “Why we’re mad at De Blasio”. That was “We *are* mad at De Blasio”. But no *reason* other than “he stood with Sharpton and he mentioned that he warned his son to be careful.”

    And it’s like… wow. That’s it? That’s your A game against De Blasio? That’s why we’re supposed to say “That *(expletive)*!!!” That’s why we’re supposed to accept your show of *contempt* for your duly elected boss?

    It’s not enough.

  8. After the Zimmerman trial (he’s been arrested AGAIN, BTW, for assault), the juror who almost got the book deal said she found the police testimony convincing, which shocked me, because these were the same cops who failed to arrest Zimmerman when the crime occurred.

    Today, in the wake of numerous “free pass” cards for cops who murdered unarmed civilians and still walk the streets, indeed, still PATROL the streets, I find myself wondering why anybody would give any credence to any unsubstantiated emanations from any cop.

  10. They revered Rudy!

    They loved that he supported them in the police riot that helped propel him into office. But not all the time after that.

    “But many police officers have turned their anger in recent months not on the union’s leaders, but on Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani. For instance, a flier that some police officers are distributing among the ranks demonstrates the depths of their discontent.

    The flier, resembling part of a will, says, ”I, . . ., a New York City police officer, want all of my family and brother officers who read this to know” that ”in the event of my death,” Mr. Giuliani and his Police Commissioner should ”be denied attendance of any memorial service in my honor as their attendance would only bring disgrace to my memory.”

    That’s from the NYT, February 17, 1997. During, as now, contract negotiations, by the greatest of coincidences. Not the only time either; in 1996:

    “At this point he certainly doesn’t enjoy the support of the PBA,” said Lou Matarazzo, the president of the 30,000-member Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association.”

    And in 2007, during Rudy’s presidential attempt the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association president Patrick Lynch issued a statement that said:

    “The New York City Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association could never support Rudy Giuliani for any elected office.”

  12. “Somehow he managed to blow the opportunity and not provide a reason.”

    I’m so glad to hear this. I read the piece when it came out, and my reaction was, “OK, I understand this is how you feel, I understand THAT you’re mad at the mayor. But I still don’t see any good reason WHY you’re mad at the mayor.”

  13. priscianus jr.
    ‘Cause he’s a POOPYHEAD!!! :’-<
    WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comments are closed.