Nuts! We've been gone for too long (Philly Confidential)

Nuts! We've been gone for too long

Yeah, yeah, yeah -- I know. I let it happen again. We were on a semi-roll here at Philly Confidential, posting regularly while our beloved readers were getting riled up during typically animated discussions. And how did I respond? No posts for two weeks. Not even a thoughtful, one paragraph, "Out to lunch -- will be back in an hour or two," notice. Nothing.

So, I've decided to punish myself in the most brutal fashion possible -- I'm going transcribe everything Sylvester Johnson says in public by hand from here on out. (No, I kid. There's no way I could write down 22 words a week. Zing!)

Since we've been gone from the blogosphere, the murder rate has predictably climbed higher. After a triple shooting in Germantown Tuesday night, the tally stood at 162 murders for the year, almost 20 ahead of last year's numbers.

And that, folks, brings us to a man who will remain the topic of conversation for quite some time: our all-but-certain future mayor, Michael Nutter. As Gtown_teach aptly pointed out, Your Favorite Bloggers have yet to weigh in on a guy who has loudly vowed to attack violent crime in a way that the current mayor has not -- that is, he actually acknowledges that a mayor should try to curb crime.

Nutter caught a lot of flak from his fellow candidates during the primary for openly saying he will declare some of the city's deadliest areas -- yes, I'm looking at you, North, West and Southwest Philly -- emergency zones and give cops more freedom to stop n' frisk folks in an attempt to root out thugs n' guns, who often travel together.

To analyze Nutter's plan -- and remember that 1.) he's not (yet) the mayor and 2.) none of his plans have been implemented -- it's important to note that thus far he has simply stated the obvious. A lot of genuinely good people live in those battle-scarred sections of the city, but the numbers bear out the need for action. Just take a look at the Inquirer's interactive map of last year's 2,004 shootings.

Critics of Nutter's plan say cops will go too far with the stopping n' frisking and infringe on civil rights. That, they say, is simply unconscionable. Every time I hear those complaints, I think back to a conversation I had with the candidate a few months ago, when the Daily News ran a story that pointed out that Philly was officially leading the nation's big cities in homicides. Nutter called me to talk crime and cops, and we delved into his plan a bit. I mentioned the civil rights concerns and he shot back with a simple answer: "I'd rather have 406 civil rights lawsuits than 406 dead bodies," he said.

And, well, how do you argue with that? Is it better to worry about a cop stopping you and asking if you're carrying a handgun, or worrying about your kids getting shot to death because they walked down the street at the wrong time of the day? Nutter seems to recognize the potential pitfalls of his program, and to his credit, has pledged to hold cops accountable, making them attend training and having them fill out reports detailing the rationale behind every extra pat-down.

Controversial? Maybe. But I say Nutter gets points for coming up with a plan that doesn't entirely hinge on just hiring more police officers or, God forbid, blowing a ton of overtime on the wonderfully temporary solution that was Safe Streets.

Well, that's it. I've offered my two cents. Thoughts?

Posted on May 23, 2007 5:43 PM | Permalink

Comments (138)

paul r:

Hi David,

It's been a while since our little dust up (and hopefully the dust has settled) so I thought to contribute my 2 cents here.

As I mentioned to Signe W this morning, I'm not a fan of "stop and frisk" for several reasons; first, I don't believe that it will be terribly effective. Second, trading civil liberties for some measure of perceived safety is never a good idea. As Ben Franklin once said, "Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security".

Third, in order to be effective the police will need to profile potential illegal gun owners. Since most Philly murders are committed by young black males (YBM's) against other YBM's, the obvious profile is to stop and frisk YBM's; are you comfortible with this? Do you think Philly will be comfortible with this?

With all of that said, I realize that the homicide rate in Philly is out of control. Unfortunately, I believe stop and frisk is one of those "feel good" ideas that give the impression that politicians are "doing something" to combat crime.

Anyway, my 2cents for whatever it's worth.

Paul

Posted by paul r | May 24, 2007 11:18 AM

Posted on May 24, 2007 11:18

Gtown_teach:

David,

Two cents here.. but the copper will probably be worth more than two cents soon.

Anyway, I think the stop and frisk is more a social statement than actual trying to get guns off the street. The profiling will, no doubtedly, be towards YBMs. But, it's going to be towards convict threads wearing, hanging out on the corner at all hours of the night, and school cutting YBMs. It's going to be more of a stand against a certain profile. And, while everyone will claim it's racist. I think it's a wise decision. I think there ought to be consequences for looking like, and behaving a street thug. There's a certain mentality about dress. If you're going to dress like a criminal, then chances are, you might be doing something illegal. I'm sure there will be tons of arguments against it, but in the end, there's a concrete logic to it. Dress, and behaviors are indicators that cannot be ignored.

Sure the ACLU, and other liberties groups will blast the policy, but it's just a wake up call to the current Philly communities that your appearance does matter. How you conduct yourself in public will matter. And, I'm sure that the ACLU lawyers lock their doors at night just like everyone else.

There has to be order in the city. There has to be a desperately needed re-evaluation of social priorities in this city for it's residents to become more successful than the previous generation. I think Nutter is on the same page, and I hope we too.

Posted by Gtown_teach | May 24, 2007 11:50 AM

Posted on May 24, 2007 11:50

Mike Bucceroni:

Sheez.....the first post in two weeks and already a dig at Sylvester Johnson (sigh).

I have mixed views about this, but lean toward Mr Nutter's approach with the clear understanding that this would have to be very carefully implemented lest it create "blow back".

One can not be unmindful that a strategy like this would have the likely effect of infringing upon the legitimate rights of innocent people.
That should never be understated or brushed off with a shrug.

Still.........the most basic right of any people is the right to live one's life in a safe and healthy environment, to not be preyed upon by thugs.

It is this element of the community that the approach was designed to focus on address. That must be understood clearly by the community at large.

"Stop Snitchin", turning a blind eye to what goes on, apathy, fear, and so on all are enablers which do nothing but provide a shield for the predators to hide behind.

So the communities obviously must make a choice.

Like anything else, a small element of social deviants can not long survive within a community that will not condone or tolerate it.

So the good and innocent people also are stakeholders in this, with a vested interest in ultimate success.

The people must become roused from their apathetic and fearful slumber. However, if Mr Nutter asks this of the people he must then do everything he can to minimize the fall out showered upon them as a result and ease the path.

That becomes HIS obligation to the communities.

Posted by Mike Bucceroni | May 24, 2007 5:58 PM

Posted on May 24, 2007 17:58

Paul F Tioxon:

The civil rights violations argument is institutionalized resistance to change by the last vestiges of some well meaning and others not so much acting in good faith. Our civil rights are a part of what makes up our social order. As pointed out in so many dismissive comments, the root causes of crime, poverty, ignorance, despair at overcoming unemployment, homelessness and even hunger are part and parcel of the neighborhoods that have so many of the shootings. We do not hesitate to take the obvious direct if not complete and final actions to reduce hunger, homelessness. But to use the one institution, the police, who are trained to enforce the law, is deemed illegal because of their perceived misuse of power, prior to even using it is an irrelevant, misguided argument. It is too uncomfortable for some who hope that hot breakfasts, a kind community and some other worthy gestures to ameliorate the worst aspect of a broken social order will resolve out of control violence, gun battles. Our civil rights are not ideals disconnected from our everyday lives. If my or anyone else's humanity is diminished by the criminal abuse of police power that is civil rights violation. My life is interrupted when a police car or ambulance puts on their lights and sirens. I have to slow down, pull over and stop to let them get around me. But I am not oppressed, my property is not confiscated, my reputation not tarnished, my human dignity not assaulted by an inconvenience which is in fact my small effort to maintain a greater good and preserve a worthy social order that I believe in. Is anyone proposing a military dragnet, where house by house, block by block in certain zip codes where young black men are predominant and shooting rampant a police gun search is carried out. Or just in the public sidewalks and street, every single black male is stopped and searched? A probable cause will reduce the number of these incidents because the police can not afford to waste their time on everyone. Those inconvenienced will have to be educated to their role. If they are unarmed, other than an abstract ideal of their rights, what has been done to diminish their humanity, what has been done to strip them of their dignity? As any citizen, who has to walk through the neighborhoods' streets, some safe and calm most of the time, some constantly oppressed by drug dealing, prostitution and the unending fear for your personal safety, how diminished are our lives, how seldom do we have free and unfettered access to the happiness of having a job, food on the table and a home to go where we are carefree from the troubles of the world. If we are to preserve some humane semblance of a social order worth living, in this city, at this point in time, young black men may have to be stopped by the police, in a lawful manner, not to humiliate them or strip them of their dignity, but rebuild a community where the will of the people, not the might of armed criminals informs the culture.

Posted by Paul F Tioxon | May 24, 2007 6:05 PM

Posted on May 24, 2007 18:05

paul r:

Unfortunately Paul T., when it comes to rights, there is only black and white. In other words, you can't sacrifice the rights or civil liberties of certain people without damaging the very social fabric you are trying to defend.

To be honest, I would prefer that the next Mayor of Philly impose a “state of emergency” rather than a half hearted and ineffective stop ‘n frisk policy. After all, an SOE is a loud, messy and very public affair that is sure to bring out the ACLU and a myriad of other protestors thus assuring that abuses are minimal. It will also assure that the SOE will end. The problem with incremental policies like stop ‘n frisk is that once implemented they never go away.

Let’s work the problem. The simple truth is that Philly has way too many young, soulless, feral, super predators that, in many cases are beyond redemption. They need to be arrested and incarcerated.

Sounds harsh but…

One more point; stop ‘n frisk puts LEO’s in a very dangerous situation. When confronting potentially armed thugs in close proximity their guns will be drawn and they will be in condition red; will anyone be surprised when a few unarmed YBM’s are shot?

Posted by paul r | May 24, 2007 9:10 PM

Posted on May 24, 2007 21:10

david:

Paul R hits on a good point -- and the next potential controversy. Nutter's plan would put police officers in more direct physical contact with armed thugs, and that would no doubt translate into an increase in police involved shootings.

I agree whole-heartedly with those who have said that we need to go beyond stop n' frisk and address the poverty, jobs and education issues that are the root causes of our violence problem.

But at the same time, we do need to get our violent citizens off the street -- preferably before they can take more lives. I don't necessarily think Nutter's plan is perfect or the only possible way to get criminals off the streets -- I just think he's the first guy to stand up and back a different idea, critics be damned, in a long time. There's something to be said for that.

Posted by david | May 24, 2007 10:53 PM

Posted on May 24, 2007 22:53

random ass hero:

David ,I strongly urge you to read up on philadelphia and there police operations,specifically op cold turkey which is the same thing your boy nutter wants to do.I mean i hope it works and i love to see assholes stoppe and frisked.I also like to see the police kick their ass (I really like to see that)but contrary to what nutter tells you west and north philadelphia wont turn into the shining city ontop the hill like you sound like you believe.Im just a realist.But we shall see.

Posted by random ass hero | May 28, 2007 10:11 PM

Posted on May 28, 2007 22:11

random:

Im sorry i dont believe that shooting map,Not that many white peolpe live in those areas.There has to be a mistake.

Posted by random | May 28, 2007 10:30 PM

Posted on May 28, 2007 22:30

Anonymous:

I cant wait till this shmuck gets into office im gonna walk around high crime areas with a bulge in my pocket then when they frisk im gonna sue the shit outta the city. yea, stop and frisk fuck this conservative asshole.

Posted by Anonymous | May 30, 2007 11:34 PM

Posted on May 30, 2007 23:34

familiar supplant resources,undergraduate mint doubtlessly locality!

Posted by | July 29, 2007 1:31 PM

Posted on July 29, 2007 13:31

brashly attainments welcomes.Shanghai martyrdom .

Posted by | July 29, 2007 1:33 PM

Posted on July 29, 2007 13:33

james ahn:

eat my shorts and suuk nutter

Posted by james ahn | August 2, 2007 10:02 AM

Posted on August 2, 2007 10:02