Y-NYPD1-articleLarge

“The number of murders in [New York] city has been declining for years, but 2015 is bucking the trend,” ny1.com reports. Huh. So I guess the passage of the unconstitutional gun grab known as the SAFE Act didn’t reduce violent crime as advertised. I’m not a criminologist, but I’m thinking the court-ordered demised of the Big Apple’s equally unconstitutional “stop and frisk” policing policy – a decision with which I wholeheartedly agree – might have had something to do with the city’s firearms-related homicide surge. And quite the surge it is . . .

While overall crime is down 11 percent in 2015, there were 54 murders in the first two months of the year, compared to 45 last year, a 20 percent increase. There were 151 shootings, an increase of 20 percent as well. The number of shooting victims this year, 170, is up from 140 at this time last year.

The Powers That Be don’t agree with my stop ‘n frisk theory. They reckon it’s all down to . . . wait for it . . . weed.

The NYPD says the use of marijuana is a big business and has become a big problem. Police say a lot more people are getting shot and killed over pot, compared to cocaine and heroin.

“We are not seeing that type of issue, that type of violence related to those other drugs, but we are seeing it with marijuana,” said Police Commissioner Bratton.

In fact, police say seven people have been killed so far this year because of drugs and all were because of weed.

“These are all rip offs, these are not turf battles. These are rip offs of marijuana dealers, robberies. That’s where we’re coming from,” said NYPD Chief of Detectives Robert Boyce.

The sale of marijuana generates a lot of cash and police say robbers are targeting pot dealers. And the gunmen are involved in selling marijuana as well . . .

“When you dig down into that criminal arrests history of the individuals arrested for homicide this year, we see controlled substance and we see marijuana, but we’re seeing marijuana at a 2 to 1 percentage over the controlled substance, so marijuana is coming up repeatedly,” said NYPD Deputy Commissioner Dermot Shea.

The NYPD says its new policy of not arresting people for possession of small amounts of marijuana does not appear to be a factor in the spike in violence. There has been an 80 percent decrease in such arrests since 2011.

Wait! Here’s a theory I can believe in!

Police brass say the majority of shootings are gang or crew related and that five areas are responsible for the spike: the 46th, 63rd, 67th, 75th and 102rd precincts.

The NYPD is considering putting extra resources in those troubled areas. It’s also already looking at where more officers should go for the summer months.

Wait. No mention of restoring New York City residents’ gun rights to protect innocent life from this weed-related (if that’s what you want to believe) crime wave? Don’t worry. It’s coming . . . [h/t PetitionForRedress]

44 Responses to New York’s SAFE Act Not Making New York City Safer

  1. Well, if you aren’t shot with a gun sporting an 8-round-or-more magazine, you’re not really shot, so there-the SAFE Act is working!

    • The SAFE act is working as intended. It is achieving the only thing it could logically be expected to achieve- the disarmament of the law abiding making them more vulnerable victims. Unless those pushing it were complete morons than the logically predictable affects are the intended affects– despite what was advertised in order to sell it.

      • The “SAFE” Act is working EXACTLY as intended. The intent is to create a police state under which every single gun owner is under constant surveillance and threat of confiscation, and to disarm law-abiding, tax-paying, non-criminal citizens so that when the cops roll up in the MRAP to do a no-knock on your home at 3 a.m. wearing Level IV body armor and carrying “patrol rifles” with 30 round magazines, they are pretty much guaranteed to be able kill you (and your dog and your wife) and you have no ability to fight back.

        I find it quite incongruous that Gov. Cuomo’s 24-7 security detail is not limited to 7-round magazines… and that YOU may not have an “assault weapon” but now every cop needs that same weapon for a “patrol rifle”…

  2. Crime rises and falls. All crimes – violent, property crimes, crimes involving guns, etc. For myriad reasons.

    Has any gun control legislation, at any level – Federal, state, municipal, etc., EVER been correlated to a decrease in any type of crime. I mean a definitive correlation, not coincidental.

    I think if anything, John Lott has found at least some evidence that fewer restrictions on guns correlate to less crime of all types. Never has more restrictions been correlated to less crime.

    Really, all you have to do is study the historical crime trends in NY City and what the social, economic and most of all political environment was at the time.

    • I could be that certain crimes are down while others are up. But the more likely explanation is that all manipulatable crimes are down, or down graded as it were, but you can’t downgrade a shooting or a murder. Comp-Stat is a real thing. Cops manipulating data to make it look like they’re doing their jobs, but the emperor has no clothes. And people are starting to notice. This goes along with the war on drugs. If these markets weren’t underground, there wouldn’t be a reason to be violent as any disagreements could be handled like they are in polite society. That won’t make a utopia as garbage is as garbage does, but it would cure some ills.

    • Never heard of it myself. It must be some manufactured substance made from common house hold products.

      They should keep it illegal because of it’s horrendously high death rate. I hear that it’s higher then alcohol which is in the tens of thousands and cigarettes which are in the hundreds of thousands every year.

      Oh, wait aminute, I looked it up on the CDC website. Deaths directly attributed to the consumption of this thing called ‘weed”.

      Zero.

      It looks like more people are dying selling it than from using it.

        • Probably while doing a u-turn in front of a semi-truck when they saw a Pizza Hut across the road.

        • As an EMT we used to say “drunk drivers kill kids. High drivers miss their exit.”

  3. The NYPD says the use of marijuana is a big business and has become a big problem. Police say a lot more people are getting shot and killed over pot,
    Why not legalize pot?

  4. I suppose NYC had stricter gun laws in place before the NY non-Safe Act, so I doubt if it had anything to do with the uptick in crime in NYC.

    • Yup, in most respects the UnSAFE Act is still more lenient than prevailing NYC law.

      Blame DeBlasio for the crime rise.

      • Could the increase in crime have anything to do with the various work slowdowns by the NYPD ‘cuz the mayor hurt their feelings?

        • If it’s not worth a life to go after criminals and police will get a near-lynching if they do so… why would they?

          If you walk through those neighborhoods with the increased homicide rates you’d find they have something in common… they don’t want cops there.

    • So it’s really 151 shootings that were “workplace violence.” Got it. Nothing to see here. Move along…

  5. It seems like a perfect environment to try to legalize pot. Make it legal for 5yrs and see if crime goes down or simply stays the same.

    • That is a good start, but add in that all 2A restrictions are repealed as well. That would be the experiment I would like to see.

  6. Funny this message board struggling with the “why” of crime. Clearly nobody here is a criminal or knows one.

  7. It’s all those backwards, inbreeding southerners’ fault… And Bush’s fault… And the NRA’s fault… And gun nuts’ fault… And the children, it’s their fault too, the little bastards.

  8. Couldn’t it be the increase in homicides has some little something to do with the NYPD’s open disaffection with Comrade de Blasio and resulting “work slowdown”? I have heard the hypothesis that the increase in homicides has to do with sales of weed and weed dealer rip-offs, turf wars and so on all related to weed trafficking. Objectionable and unConstitutional as it may be, “Stop and Frisk” in the Big Apple worked to reduce street crime and homicide. There’s no viable alternative to “Stop and Frisk”, however, and it only fed the meme about Law Enforcement targeting minorities in a discriminatory fashion..

    Maybe New Yorkers are just suffering from Colorado Envy in their lust for weed.

    “Wait. No mention of restoring New York City residents’ gun rights to protect innocent life from this weed-related (if that’s what you want to believe) crime wave? Don’t worry. It’s coming . . .”
    I wouldn’t hold my breath on that one, unless you mean by “mention” a mention to specify that option is completely off the table.

    • Stop and frisk, as unconstitutional as is was, worked as a deterrent. It was never a “policing tool” to catch criminals as the city claims. It’s the same effect that happens with concealed carriers since you don’t know who is carrying.

  9. The only time NYC was truly safe was when the cops went on “strike.” But the bureaucrats were losing too much revenue, so that job action stopped right quick. Gotta fund the pensions donchaknow.

  10. I think we PotG ought to look at the 4A – Stop & Frisk controversy as an opportunity. We need not approach it in so simple-minded a way as to say that because of the 4A we are against S&F. Let us – like our Progressive opponents – be more nuanced in our analysis.
    First, let us observe that each of the Amendments is worded differently; and, words matter. 1A says “NO law”; 2A says “not be INFRINGED”; 3A says “NO soldier”; while 4A says “UN-reasonable searches”. Admittedly, there is more leeway in the 4A than there is in the preceding 3 Amendments.
    Second, for better or for worse, SCOTUS has ruled that Terry Stops are constitutional. It might be mistaken; but that is the law at the moment. We ought to be sensitive to the sentiments of citizens who are Terry-Stopped. The less intrusive the stop, the more tolerant the courts may be of allowing this law-enforcement technique.
    Now, then, the case for making a drug-bust on a Terry-Stop ought to be far weaker than making a felon-in-posession bust. If we want to deprive armed felons from freedom-of-movement then we ought to be able to accomplish that by “wanding” the subject of a Terry-Stop with a metal detector. No metal and the subject will be on-his-way in less than a minute.
    Only if metal is detected does the Terry-Stop need to be escalated beyond wanding. Anyone annoyed by being frisked could dispose of the suspicion that he might be carrying by presenting his CWP. This, of course, presupposes that jurisdictions wishing to avail themselves of S&F would change from being Won’t-Issue to being Shall-Issue.
    This line of reasoning puts the Progressive mind into melt-down. They want to deprive felons from armed freedom-of-movement. They want Power-to-the-State. They don’t want to annoy protected minorities. They don’t want Shall-Issue. Are these progressives willing to concede on Shall-Issue in order to control felons-in-posession? They could achieve tighter control over felons-in-posession without annoying law-abiding minorities.

    I’m not eager to concede ground on the 4A. Nevertheless, I think other infringements on the 4A (e.g., no-knock) are far more important than the Terry-Stop. The line of reasoning discussed above ought to throw the Progressives into a state of confusion in pairing-off the 4A vs the 2A. Confusion in their ranks can’t help but advance the level of discourse.

  11. The drug crews are only killing each other, so it’s no big deal. In fact, why not encourage the practice?

  12. they need a law making it illegal to gun-murder someone over marijuana. problem solved!

    owww i strained a muscle rolling my eyes… :-\

  13. So my question is which of those two upstanding groups, the dealers or the robbers got their firearms legally? There are just as many or more criminals with guns now as there were before the SAFE act was passed, how has this helped to keep the people of NY state safe?

  14. The list of high crime precincts on the list should come as no surprise to New Yorkers. The 46, on Ryer Ave. in the Bronx has been a problem area since the 1970’s. To those of you not from the city, it’s the infamous “Fort Apache” of movie fame. The only time it saw a crime drop was during the era of “community policing” which included neighborhood sweeps and stop & frisk. Contrary to the opinion of many, the tactic wasn’t as general as the press led you to believe. In practice, it was much like any observation of mannerisms; etc. used to determine if a person was carrying. In the event of an officer being reasonably suspicious of a person they were then stopped, questioned and frisked. The results were quite useful in getting illegal guns off the streets. These cretins weren’t very adept at concealed carry and their Constitutional rights were not being violated. The law-abiding who can’t carry legally in NY are the victims; not these creeps.

  15. Fairly certain they’ll just blame “lax gun laws” in other states for their problems at some point. Antis are nothing if not predictable.

  16. NYC is still the same craphole it was when I left there. Nothing has changed except the poor are getting poorer.
    People there have less then zero respect for police then they ever did before. Must be great to be a cop in NYC today.
    When I was a kid at least there was a cop walking his beat and you knew his name and he knew yours.
    They weren’t just some jackbooted thugs driving past you in a car back then.
    So yes some things have changed. None for the better.

  17. they are not fighting over weed, they are fighting over money. the weed is just the substance that is worth the money. an example of not seeing the forest for the trees

  18. Whether stop and frisk lowered crime or not, there is something fundamentally wrong with the police being giving this authority. It stands against everything this nation was founded upon.

  19. More deaths related to weed than those related to harder drugs? Did I read this wrong? They really expect the public to buy this horse manure ? They need to hire new PR people if that is all they could come up with.

  20. Well, here we go again.
    This fictitious weed related shooting spree story is exactly how Cuomo works. Now hes going to make weed legal, then he will claim that weed related shootings have stopped. See what a hero he is?
    His plan has been to legalize pot for awhile now, so he can collect the revenue. To quiet chi

    the people that oppose legal pot, he is going to use this “weed related shooting'” crap. Hes got to legalize pot, to stop he bloodshed….its for the children.
    Corrupt, drug pushing, lying, diluted, paranoid, you know, a typical liberal.
    If you believe this crap you are the kind of voter Andy boy lives for!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *