Sun Times Panders

Of course, when has the Sun Times NOT pandered? This is just par for the course and we haven't had an opportunity to slap the media around in a while, so let's see if we've lost a step. Here's a political hit piece disguised as an "editorial" that appeared 05 July:

• Mass traffic stops that don’t stop crime show Chicago sorely needs policing reform

Oooo....scary headline! A lie, a false premise, and a completely unprovable conclusion. Way to begin!

• Chicago Police officers have stopped Austin resident Jacquez Beasley at least 12 times since he got his driver’s license three years ago. He’s been ordered out of his car, frisked and had his vehicle searched. Yet officers have never issued the Chicago Park District employee a traffic citation, arrested him or seized any contraband.

Did he commit a traffic violation? Did he commit an arrestable offense? Did he have any contraband? No idea!

• Police have pulled over South Lawndale resident José Manuel Almanza Jr., a U.S. Marine Corps veteran who works for a West Side racial justice organization, more than 12 times since 2021. As with Beasley, police have never ticketed Almanza, arrested him or seized any guns or drugs from his car.

Same three questions

• South Shore resident Mahari Bell, a marketing consultant and part-time driver for UberEats and DoorDash, has been subject to at least 10 traffic stops. He’s been ordered out of his car, handcuffed and had his vehicle searched — but has never been ticketed, arrested or had contraband seized.

Same three questions

• What’s going on here can’t be written off as just unfortunate coincidence, according to a lawsuit filed in federal court last week against the city and the Chicago Police Department, by the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. Seems a lot like the new stop and frisk, and it’s doing little or nothing to stop crime.

One more question Slum Times - were the stops recorded on in-car and body cam video?

:::crickets::: 

Of course they were! Not recording is a suspend-able offense. Not recording with intent is a felony - Class 3 - and will result in the officer losing his job and going to prison. And to drive that point home a bit more, WOL's (watch commanders) are required to view these videos on a daily basis, note infractions and take corrective/disciplinary action. Failure to do so results in them being suspended, usually starting at three days and moving upwards.

Almost no one is not recording stops any more and those that aren't are being tagged for three, five, seven, even thirty days off. IAD and COPA are bragging about suspension days being handed out. If there aren't any separations already, there will be because it's been the law of the Department, City and State for a few years now.

The "editorial" continues:

• The 147-page lawsuit details a list of repeated, invasive traffic stops by police of Beasley, Almanza, Bell and two additional plaintiffs, all of whom are Black or Latino. The plaintiffs were pulled over for minor infractions like a burned-out tail light — or no infraction at all — and were forced to answer questions such as whether they had a firearms owner ID card or where they were going.

Um....so minor infractions aren't infractions anymore? We must have missed that one, because we've been seeing misdemeanor trespassers in Washington DC being held for over two years without trial and no one at the Slum Times seems to have an issue with that.

Um....no infraction? Again - cameras. 

Um....forced to answer? Oh lord, if only! Ignorance of your Constitutional Rights and the voluntary surrender of same is not "forced to." You aren't required to tell anyone where you're going or what you're doing. Lefties and the media (but we repeat ourselves) write like this to mis-educate the citizenry to further their BS narrative.

• In some cases, the lawsuit maintains, the plaintiffs were ordered out of their vehicle while it was searched, then frisked and even handcuffed — yet none of these incidents resulted in even a traffic citation, much less an arrest or seizure of guns or drugs.

Again, as cited throughout our archives, Maryland v Wilson and Pennsylvania v Mimms. During a lawful stop, you can be ordered from the vehicle at any time for any reason and you cannot refuse. The Supreme Court said so. Stops aren't required to end in citations or arrests. Verbal and written warnings are completely legal and unless you brought illegal guns/drugs along for the ride, how are police supposed to find something that isn't there? Plant it? Again - CAMERAS.

Then we get to the heart of the lawsuit and the intent of the Slum Times:

• The ACLU analyzed more than 2.6 million traffic stops over six years, from 2016 through 2022, that showed Black drivers in Chicago are four to seven times more likely to be pulled over by police than whites, and Latino drivers are stopped twice as often.

Eek. So scary.

Four to seven times more likely....why? Are they attracting attention to themselves? Like speeding, rolling stop signs, blasting music? Are they driving like a$$holes, swerving in and out of traffic, turning illegally, littering and generally acting like the Rules of the Road don't apply to them? Maybe they don't have both plates and they aren't current in the computer and the rear one isn't lit.

Let's be nicer - are they driving a ghetto hooptie with a cracked windshield, missing hubcaps, hanging bumpers, missing gas tank door, cracked taillights, etc? And are they driving this rattle trap because, due to their economic conditions, this was the only running vehicle they could afford to get to and from work or school or even the gun range?

Because each and every reason listed above is enough to stop a car and check it out for a police officer. The police didn't make it so - the LEGISLATURE did. And then, the Legislature gave the power of enforcement to.....the police.

And then there's the elephant in room - where are these wrecks concentrated? What parts of Chicago? The poor parts? And those parts of Chicago are populated by....poor people? And poor people tend to trend....

You see where we're going? If you're working in certain Districts, where the population is 90% or greater of a certain demographic, it's damn near impossible to stop anyone NOT of that persuasion.

There's an easy solution of course. France pioneered it - No-Go Zones. you just don't send the police there and you don't enforce the laws the Legislature passed in those areas. Problem solved! 

Of course, if you watch the news, France is currently experiencing riots unlike any seen in the past decade and in the not-to-distant-future, the army will be called in to "pacify" the banlieues (slums).

Which ironically, is what the media, lefties and democrats (repeating ourselves again) want.

The editorial goes on a little more, making less sense and we imagine some of you are bored with our wordiness. But you should read it anyway and take it to heart, especially if you're stuck on this job as we are for a bit. You have no real friends in the mainstream media and they are using you for a larger agenda. The ACLU is utilizing data YOU collected to make YOU less safe and less able to afford a middle-class lifestyle. Same with the Department and the City itself.

Side Note: Is Mope-rah still on the Slum Times editorial board? This whole thing sounds like the usual crap she spews from her over-entitled criminal-coddling Maywood-dwelling piehole.