Memo To DHS Secretary

Recent events on attacks and assaults against Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents as they go about the difficult mission of finding and arresting illegal aliens to schedule for deportation indicate that we have entered a new phase. The people opposing the (ICE) raids and arrests are no longer simply demonstrating and protesting against the raids, they are employing additional tactics because the ones currently used are not deterring President Trump or his immigration enforcement officials from continuing the mass deportations. The attacks have not only escalated but have become increasingly dangerous for (ICE) field agents.

I have said in past columns on this site and in numerous television and radio interviews that it was important in the early days of the resistance for ICE officials to make it clear to agents that at they had the authority to use all reasonable means to ensure that they could carry out their mission and do so safely. Instead, all I saw was the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security appear on news shows warning that those who attacked ICE agents would be subject to arrest and prosecution. That message is not a deterrent and it is being ignored. These people are not afraid of being arrested. These are people engaged in insurrection and terrorism. Insurrectionists and terrorists use guerrilla warfare type tactics to try to defeat an opposition government that has superior weapons, infrastructure and resources than they do.

Let us consider the evolution of this pro illegal immigration movement. It may have started out that this involved well meaning believers and all we saw was people showing up in the streets holding up signs and chanting infantile slogans. But like every one of these movements going back to occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter, these protest movements were high jacked by an anti-government communist movement hell bent on creating chaos to the point of having civil society collapse. They use otherwise garden-variety protest movements that are first amendment protected as a mask. It sucks in and dupe's certain media outlets, some gullible politicians and citizens who are not fully informed. The anarchists hope to gain legitimacy using this tactic.

What we are seeing now is that the tactics being used are straight out of the anarchist's playbook. Tactics like doxing agents are designed to creat fear and bring it to the homes of agents. Now we are seeing outright physical attacks and agents are being shot at. In one instance 10 insurrectionists were arrested and under indictment for planning a large scale armed assault on (ICE) operations in Texas. These are guerrilla warfare style tactics used in war torn countries to destabilize and overthrow banana republic governments.

My concern is that the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the Acting Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement do not understand the nature of the enemy. The tactics use that I previously mentioned are war tactics. Passive rhetoric keeps coming out that attacks against agent won’t be tolerated and that arrests will be made. Those are messages used in urban policing. When your agents are being shot at, detention facilities are being attacked and firebombed, you need a war time mind set. President Trump called in the Marines to be a force multiplier. It is time to use these war fighters. (ICE) vehicles used in raiding and conveying operations should have a Marine convoy out front to prevent the vehicles from ambushes along the way. I am tired of seeing agents have to exit their vehicles and try to get people from out of the front of their cars.

A perimeter should be set up around the operation including the detention facility itself to keep the insurrectionists from blocking entry or attacking a facility. Drones should be used to protect the perimeter. Anybody breaching the perimeter and refusing orders to leave the area and who continue making their way toward agents or facilities should be considered a threat and be neutralized by drone use before they get within range to kill or injure an agent of before attacking a facility. These are not over the top recommendations. This pro illegal immigration movement has declared war on Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the federal government. They themselves as I previously mentioned are resorting to using guerrilla war type tactics. They are on their way to killing an agent. It will not be long before the insurrectionists make use of explosives. It is time for DHS to use more effective counter measures like those used in war.

You want to know who knows this? President Trump. He recently said he is tired of seeing cars carrying a law enforcement officer being attacked. He went even further and has given agents “total authorization” to protect themselves against agitators during enforcement actions. That is an open-ended authorization. I know what he means by leaving it open ended. It is for the Secretary Kristi Noem to come up with a plan. Trump called in the Marines awhile ago. Time to make use of them. Let (ICE) agents tend to the mission of deportation. That is what they are trained to do. Let the Marines take over security operations. That is what they are good at. Among other things that they handle, they provide security for military base facilities. They know how to provide for and accomplish facilities and personnel security.

Courage is needed here by higher ups at DHS and (ICE). They put agents in harms way with a mission. They have an obligation to provide all the safety they can for the agents to succeed and go home at night.

It is time to stop playing patty cake with these armed and dangerous insurrectionists. The federal government has superior resources. Stop being afraid to use them and crush this movement. Force them to abandon their fight psychologically and physically.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Neighborhood Crime Watch: How to Protect Your Community and Reduce Crime Rates

By: Joel E. Gordon

Community safety starts with us. When neighbors come together, they create a powerful shield against crime. A neighborhood crime watch is more than just a group—it's a way to build trust, enhance security, and make the streets safer for everyone. In this article, you'll learn how to set up a crime watch, effective tactics to keep your neighborhood secure, and inspiring stories of how communities made a difference.

A neighborhood crime watch is an organized group of residents who work together to monitor their community. These programs aim to prevent crime by encouraging neighbors to stay alert, share information, and look out for each other. They serve as a visible sign to criminals that the neighborhood is watchful and less welcoming to wrongdoers.

Studies show that neighborhoods with active crime watch programs tend to see fewer burglaries, vandalism, and assaults. Experts say such efforts can cut crime by up to 25%. When residents stay alert and report suspicious activity promptly, offenders are less likely to target the area.

Joining or creating a crime watch means more than just reducing crime. It builds a sense of community and helps neighbors get to know each other better. When people are connected, they look out for one another—making safety a shared priority. Plus, residents feel more at peace knowing they’re part of a proactive group.

Begin by gathering information. Conduct a simple survey or chat with neighbors to hear their worries about safety. Look at crime data from local police reports to spot patterns. This helps you identify what issues need immediate attention and what residents care about most.

Next, find a few committed neighbors to help lead the effort. These core members will organize meetings and plan activities. It's also helpful to include local leaders, such as community center staff or police officers, to add credibility and resources.

Create a plan for how neighbors will stay in touch. Use email lists, social media pages, or messaging apps like WhatsApp. Set regular meeting times and share updates frequently. Apps like Nextdoor can help you reach a wider audience and share safety tips easily.

Reach out to your local police department. They can offer advice, support, and even participate in neighborhood events. Respect privacy laws and make sure all residents agree on how information is shared. Building a good relationship with law enforcement boosts your program’s success.

Encourage neighbors to patrol their streets at different times. Safety should always come first—never go alone or take risks. When you observe something suspicious, keep a safe distance and note details. Your goal is to deter crime, not to confront offenders.

Simple upgrades can make a big difference. Install bright lighting around homes and dark corners. Make sure doors and windows lock securely. Installing neighborhood signs announcing a crime watch program can also warn potential intruders that the area is protected.

Organize safety workshops for residents. Share practical tips on how to spot and report crimes. Distribute flyers or posters with contact info for police and neighborhood watch members. Keep everyone informed to build confidence and readiness.

Modern tools can boost your efforts. Set up surveillance cameras at key points. Use crime watch apps for quick reporting and updates. Train neighbors on how to document suspicious activity properly. Technology makes it easier to stay connected and alert.

Make involvement easy and rewarding. Host small events or give recognition for volunteer efforts. When neighbors feel appreciated, they are more likely to stay committed. Promote a sense of ownership—your community’s safety depends on everyone's active role.

Create a mindset where everyone looks after each other. Teach residents to trust their instincts and report unusual activity. Build trust and openness so neighbors feel comfortable sharing concerns.

Throw block parties, safety fairs, or regular meetings. These gatherings strengthen bonds and reinforce the idea that safety is a shared goal. When neighbors enjoy each other’s company, everyone feels safer and more connected.

Some communities saw crime drop dramatically after starting a watch program. For example, a neighborhood in Ohio reduced burglaries by 30% within a year through regular patrols and community events. Another group in California created a social media presence that helped catch a suspect quickly.

Law enforcement officials often recommend consistency and community involvement. Police officers say that good communication and visible patrols can make a big difference. Community leaders stress that sustained effort and neighbor participation are key to lasting success.

Neighborhood crime watch programs can be powerful tools to keep your community safe. They bring people together, create awareness, and reduce opportunities for crime. Whether you're just starting or looking to improve your existing group, take small steps today. Reach out to neighbors, connect with local police, and build a neighborhood where everyone looks out for each other. Together, we can create a safer, friendlier place to live.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department, has been certified as a crime prevention specialist, and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Elected Sheriffs vs. Appointed Police Chiefs: Who's in Charge?

By: Joel E. Gordon

When it comes to law enforcement, the roles of elected sheriffs and appointed police chiefs spark a lot of debate. They each have unique responsibilities, powers, and ways of connecting with the community. So, what’s the difference?

An elected sheriff is a local law enforcement official chosen by the voters. It’s like having your say in who patrols your streets. Sheriffs usually run for office, and their term can last from four to six years, depending on the state. Because they are elected, sheriffs often need to be in tune with the community's needs and concerns.

Being an elected official means they answer directly to the public. If they’re not doing their job well, people can vote them out. This connection can create a sense of accountability. Elected sheriffs can also enforce state laws, manage county jails, and handle community policing. In my home state of West Virginia, our county Sheriff’s also serve as the county treasurer overseeing tax collection and being a required signatory on all payments made by county commissioners.

On the flip side, an appointed police chief is hired by a city’s mayor or city council. This position isn’t decided by a public vote, which means the chief might not feel the same pressure to align with community opinions. Instead, they’re typically selected for their experience and qualifications in law enforcement albeit often highly political to fit within a certain political narrative.

Appointed police chiefs often focus on crime rates, departmental efficiency, and administrative duties rather than direct ties to the community. This structure allows for quicker decisions and policies because it’s less influenced by public opinion. However, it can lead to disconnects between the police department and the community it serves.

With elected sheriffs, accountability is straightforward. If they’re not performing, the community can voice their discontent at the polls. This aspect can lead to more community-oriented policing. People often feel more comfortable approaching an elected sheriff who they believe represents their interests.

Appointed police chiefs, while still accountable to the city government, may lack the same direct connection with the community. They may prioritize the mayor’s agenda over public opinion. This situation can lead to a sense of detachment from the very community they serve.

The way sheriffs and police chiefs engage with the community is a major point of distinction. Elected sheriffs tend to be more visible during community events. They might participate in local meetings, volunteer efforts, and even social media outreach. This visibility helps build trust and rapport.

Meanwhile, appointed police chiefs may focus on internal policies and crime statistics. While they certainly care about community safety, they might not have the same grassroots access or community-driven focus as elected sheriffs. This could mean a lack of understanding of local issues or concerns.

Leadership style is another area where sheriffs and police chiefs may differ. Elected sheriffs often adopt a more democratic approach, prioritizing community input. Their leadership can feel collaborative, with officers encouraged to engage with citizens.

Appointed police chiefs often operate under a more authoritative style. They might implement top-down policies aimed at efficiency and effectiveness. This can create a streamlined department, but it could also mean less room for community involvement in decision-making.

With all of the traditional differences between being in an elected versus appointed position of leadership, my own personal experience as a police chief was perhaps less than what could be considered conventional in many jurisdictions? I always was guided by my own moral compass. As a servant leader my primary focus and earned loyalty was to my officers and the community who entrusted us with their safety needs. At times when disagreements with the mayor or town council would occur, I stood my ground and made the case for what I knew to be in the best interest for the greater good.

So, when it comes to elected sheriffs versus appointed police chiefs, which is better? It depends on the community’s needs and values. Some may prefer the accountability and connection of an elected sheriff, believing that local voices matter most. Others might value the efficiency and expertise of an appointed chief, favoring what can be a more professional approach to law enforcement.

Ultimately, both roles are crucial for a safe and secure community. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each can help citizens make informed decisions about their law enforcement leaders.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Those Who Forget the Past

Let me begin this article with a disclaimer. There is no bigger supporter of law enforcement both the profession and the people who serve than I have been and will forever continue to be. I have said repeatedly in a very public way that when law enforcement is right, I will defend them to the wall and when they are wrong, I will be the first to point it out and take them to task. With that out of the way, let me address the recent riots in Los Angeles and the police response.

It was not that long ago that major cities across America experienced some of the worst riots since the nineteen sixties. Most officers serving today were in diapers during the race riots of the sixties and do not have the experience of lessons learned in post after action analysis since sixty years went by before the riots in Ferguson, Missouri. Then the George Floyd, Eric Garner Freddy Gray and Breonna Taylor riots happened in rapid succession. The riot management and suppression brought on techniques that were questionable at best.

Tactics such as having officers hold the line instead of aggressively advancing to restore order and protect life and property allowed cities to burn and looting of businesses to go on unabated. Police leadership, and I use that term lightly here, bought into the nonsense that a more assertive approach might add fuel to the fire and escalate tensions. Some agency commanders even went as far as ordering officers not to wear riot gear including ballistic armor and helmets and that a softer dress might diffuse things as officers were being pelted with rocks, bricks and frozen water bottles. I am not making this up.

These same tactics were implemented during the race riots of the sixties. In after action analysis, it was learned that this soft approach led to more deaths and injuries to officers, demonstrators, and resulted in millions more in property loss and damage. The conclusion showed that had officers and commanders taken a more aggressive approach early on, lives could have been saved along with property. And I am tired of politicians and media hosts saying that it’s only property and that property is replaceable.

First, it is not their property that is being looted and destroyed. Second, many businesses cannot recover the total loss because their premiums do not include loss and damage due to a riot. And keep in mind that the owner has to pay a deductible and that after making a claim at that amount they find it impossible to find insurance again and that new coverage becomes so cost prohibited that they go out of business. It is important to point out that government owned buildings and squad cars are not owned by the government. These are publicly owned assets paid for by the American taxpayer. Squad cars are a finite asset. It is not like agencies have hundreds or thousands of cars available to replace a destroyed vehicle. The same with officers. If an officer goes down with injury, they are not quickly replaceable.

The law enforcement tactics used recently in Los Angeles do not put officers in a position to succeed. The response is the early hours was slow. Officers were not dressed in riot gear. They were pelted with rocks and bottles. It did not look like they had a plan or had a clearly defined mission. I saw officers standing face to face with rioters with officers lined up behind them. That is a tactical mistake. That maneuver has not been used since wars in the 17 and 1800 hundreds when soldiers marched toward each other in preparation for hand-to-hand combat.

What if someone throws a Molotov cocktail into a group of officers? This positioning doesn’t allow for tear gas to be deployed if crowd dispersal becomes necessary. A better tactic is to create a protective inner and outer perimeter around officers that no one is allowed to breach. Standing flatfooted in front of rioters does not make sense. This should only be used to advance and push the crowd backwards not stand face to face in a stare down.

Decisive decision making early on is critical. Inaction in the first hours allowed the riot to gain momentum. The California Governor and LA mayor downplayed what was happening. That is a gross tactical error. A state of emergency should have been declared after the first night. The LAPD police chief held a news conference the next day lamenting that the rioters were not locals. Who Cares? He wasted an opportunity to reassure residents of LA what they were going to do about it. He stated that his officers were overwhelmed. That is understandable. Quickly marshaling resources to counter the riots was called for.

What was needed operationally was a phased controlled application of force early on in the riot. The proper measured and controlled application of law enforcment force including the use of deadly force is a humane and civilized response. The inhumane response is to vacillate while innocent citizens live in terror, officers are needlessly injured while businesses are looted and property goes up in flames. Contrary to what the governor, mayor and a host of other leftist politicians claimed, that President Trumps’ calling up the guard and sending in Marines escalated the riots, the opposite is true. It was the right call. An early shock of force can keep a riot form gaining momentum and make others reconsider joining in. Politicians and elected leaders must avoid deluding themselves into thinking that they are preventing lives from being lost, countless injured and billions loss in property damage by downplaying the severity of the moment and delaying an effective response.

In the end, repeating the mistakes made in earlier riots makes tentative and indecisive governors, mayors, and law enforcement executives the riot maker's best friend.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Moving Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Impact of Police TV Shows: Influence, Perception, and Reality

By: Joel E. Gordon

Police TV shows are a big part of our culture. They excite audiences with police chases, dramatic arrests, and clever forensics. These shows are more than just entertainment—they shape how we see law enforcement. How many of us became enamored with the thought of becoming a law enforcement officer as a result of TV shows such as Adam-12, Hill Street Blues, and many more past and more contemporary shows? As viewers, we often take what we watch as a glimpse into the real world of policing. But how do these shows actually influence police work, policies, and public trust?

Image Source: https://pixabay.com/photos/remote-control-tv-watch-tv-watch-4891936/

From the gritty streets of Law & Order to the high-tech labs of CSI, crime shows have been a staple for decades. They reflect society’s hopes and fears about crime and justice. Over time, these shows have introduced new themes, like cybercrime or terrorism. With every new series, viewers see policing as a fast-paced, tech-savvy battle against evil. TV dramas often make police look like heroes who solve crimes quickly and effortlessly. People tend to expect swift results based on what they see on screen. This can lead to impatience with real police, who face many hurdles and delays. Citizens might believe that technology or clever tricks should always work, thanks to media portrayals.

The hero cop is a common image on TV. These characters often ignore the hard, messy reality of police work. It can give viewers a skewed view of law enforcement. Another problem? Shows sometimes show misconduct or corruption, but in exaggerated ways. This can make the public more suspicious and less trusting of police.

Many police officers and departments mimic techniques they see on TV. For example, the CSI Effect has made jurors expect forensic evidence in every case. This has pushed police to improve labs and focus on evidence collection. Some units now train with methods popularized on TV, believing they’re proven to work.

TV stories have inspired real policies. Take body cameras, for instance. Shows that depict police actions have made the public demand more transparency. Departments even adopt community policing ideas, like officers building relationships with locals, inspired by TV characters who do the same. TV often shows police catching bad guys in minutes. In reality, investigations take weeks or months. The emphasis on technology or quick fixes might distract from addressing deeper issues. For example, systemic bias or social problems are rarely shown as part of the story, yet they play a big role in real policing.

Many departments use TV-style imagery to attract new officers. The idea of a glamorous, action-packed career appeals to young people. Ads show officers as heroines and heroes, which can be motivating but also misleading.

Some shows highlight police working with communities. These stories can inspire real departments to build better trust with citizens. For example, programs that portray officers as neighbors and helpers show positive role models, helping to break down barriers.

While TV can inspire, it’s important to stay realistic. Too much focus on drama might create false expectations for recruits. It’s essential to teach new officers that police work involves patience, fairness, and understanding of social issues.

Researchers have studied how TV shapes public views. Many find that shows can skew perceptions, making some citizens believe policing is always perfect or that misconduct is rare. Experts warn about the dangers of unrealistic portrayals.

Shows that dramatize certain tactics might undermine transparency. When police are shown hiding or manipulating evidence, it can influence how viewers see the justice system. Responsible portrayals are vital for maintaining public trust.

Creators should work closely with law enforcement to show accurate stories. Shows need to balance entertainment with truth. Realistic depictions help audiences understand police work’s complexities, fostering respect and support.

Police TV shows hold a powerful influence. They shape how the public views law enforcement and can impact how police operate. We must be mindful of this dual role—entertainment and education. Responsible storytelling and accurate portrayals build trust and foster better policing. By being aware of media’s role, we can create a more informed and fair relationship with those who serve and protect us.

Take this as a call to watch critically, question what you see, and support realistic portrayals that reflect the true challenges and victories of policing today.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Free At Last

I have been on what can be described as a crusade to criticize the take-over of local police departments by the United States Department of Justice put on steroids by the Barack Obama USDOJ led by former Attorney General Eric Holder. It was nothing more than a nefarious attempt to take control of local policing by coercing cities to agree to federal guidelines.

None of these take-overs had anything to do with police reform. It was unadulterated raw politics that stirred up hatred for the American police officer. Nearly every time the USDOJ under Obama and former President Biden ordered a pattern and practice investigation into an urban police department to find whether an agency was engaging in racially motivated and discriminatory policing, the verdict was guilty as charged.

Using faulty statistical findings led to a misinterpretation of the data collected. No benchmarks were ever set. Cops working in high crime areas in predominantly black neighborhoods are going to encounter more black residents and stop more black motorists than any other demographic. That without more interpretation is not evidence of racially motivated policing.

Finding an agency guilty nineteen times out of twenty pattern and practice investigations under Obama does not pass the eye test. It implies that most police agencies are inherently racist. It is a big lie and did much to harm the trust and relationship that officers work so hard to create. Obama and Biden did not care. They knew that fomenting everything into racial conflict was beneficial for them politically.

When a law enforcement agency succumbs to this intimidation, they allow themselves to be taken over by the USDOJ. A federal monitor who has no experience in urban policing nor other lawful techniques that control crime, is put in charge of overseeing all aspects of operations. Any policy change has to be approved by the monitor before it can be implemented. Copious reporting of all traffic stops and field interviews by officers in the field turn what are supposed to be crime fighters into data gatherers. It keeps them from the streets causing less time spent on preventive patrols and high visibility. These activities prevent and deter crime. Fighting crime becomes secondary as it causes officers to withdraw from assertive policing.

President Donald Trump ran for a second term promising not only to end USDOJ involvement in local policing but to end existing consent decrees. He has kept his word. Recently the Attorney General Pam Bondi led Justice Department said that it will abandon its court approved settlements with departments and cities in Minneapolis where the death of George Floyd began the USDOJ pattern and practice investigation and in Louisville where the death of Breonna Tayor led to an investigation in that city. In fact, it goes further. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dillion is retracting accusations made by the Biden administration that officers in those two agencies violated the constitutional rights of Floyd or Taylor. Dhillion called these decrees an experiment of handcuffing cities and police with factually unjustified consent decrees. The Justice Department also said that they are closing pattern and practice investigations in four other cities.

Some people claim without evidence that these decrees lead to improved relations with minority communities. Others claim that they are too costly and burdensome to be effective. The National Fraternal Order of Police Executive Director said that consent decrees can worsen tensions between communities and police. The National FOP President said that the decrees have never worked and never will work. According to Axios news site, “most police agencies in court ordered agreements saw violent crime rates skyrocket immediately.” Other negative impacts of these decrees point out that it has led to a decrease in crimes solved and that it has had a demoralizing impact on officers, lowering their motivation and effectiveness.

There are other examples of the ineffectiveness and cost of consent decrees. The city of Albuquerque, New Mexico recently asked a court to end its federal monitoring of the police department after 10 years. They hired a monitor who received more than ten million dollars and had an office leased to him where the public could call or visit. A report about the office said that when they called, a secretary answered to take a report, but the return call by the monitor was never received. Additionally, the hours of operation were not convenient for the public to submit issues to the monitor. The request for the federal monitoring to end was granted by the judge who presided over the original agreement.

Over burdening police agencies with data gathering reports is not reform. It is important for community elected officials to directly oversee their police agencies and hold them accountable. The residents through elections can then hold politicians accountable. No fact-based report has come out that claim cities are incapable of watching their local police agency or officer behavior at the local and state level. Policing is a Tenth Amendment states right issue. States have a vested interest in controlling crime. In fact. It is the first and highest priority of local government to ensure the safety and security of its citizens.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Honoring Our Own

With a week in May being named nationally as Law Enforcement Officer Memorial Week, communities all across America stop to hold a ceremony and place the names of officers killed in the line of duty that particular year on their memorial wall. For those agencies that by the grace of God did not have an officer killed in the line of duty, it becomes an opportunity to pause and remember all the officers who were killed in the line of duty throughout history.

These are somber events as not only officers but surviving family members show up to remember the sacrifice paid by the officer killed and to remind past survivors that we have not forgotten about them. In looking back, I remember an officer who was in my academy class who was killed in our first year on the street. He was chasing a suspect wanted for an armed robbery when he was gunned down. His wife at the time was pregnant with twins. It would be their first children. I got to meet these twin boys at a law enforcement memorial ceremony when they were adults. I got to meet their dad. They never did. As Sheriff I was contacted every year by the brother of an officer killed in the line of duty as the suspect every year after he was eligible, requested to be released on parole. I was asked to write a letter to the parole commission objecting to the cop killer’s release. I reminded the board that the suspect requesting to renew his life was a slap in the face to the surviving family and that while he is alive, the officer was still dead. He has been denied parole every time he made the request. When I hear the phrase second chances, I respond that the officer did not get a second chance. His state is permanent. I have pushed for a federal law that imposes the death penalty for cop killers because most states prohibit such, but I digress.

Every man or women who has put on the uniform has their own personal heartbreaking story about a colleague killed in the line of duty. Every state in the nation has a memorial with the names of their officers who died serving their community. Then there is the law enforcement memorial in Washington DC. I have made the pilgrimage to the national memorial numerous times during police week. It is an overwhelming experience to see so many officers from so many agencies who come to pay tribute to the over twenty thousand names inscribed on the walls of the memorial in Judicary square. Every officer killed in the previous calendar year is added and their families attend. This year 147 new names will be added to the wall. It is a twenty-five percent increase over 2023 when 118 names were added.

This week is an opportunity to show the families that they are not alone in their time of grief. I make it a habit to visit the national shrine not only during law enforcement memorial week but every time I visit Washington DC as a tribute to the sacrifice these officers made serving their communities. Every time I speak before a law enforcement group, I encourage them at some time during their career to go to the nation’s Capital during police memorial week. It is a sobering experience. Those walls talk to you as you stand in the center. Each time I say a prayer and say to myself, that there but for the grace of God go I. Nearly every agency has a name inscribed. Even if they are not from your agency, they are a member of the state brother and sisterhood you live in.

No other profession has a memorial in Washington DC honoring the courage, sacrifice and the service of its members except ours. Think about that. This tribute is mainly for people who served and were killed in wars. Our monument demonstrates how appreciative the public is about the role that policing plays in an orderly society.

So, when we say that we will never forget, it is important to show it to keep this phrase from lacking true meaning. Actions speak louder than words.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Old School Policing

By: Joel E. Gordon

Old school policing has shaped the way law enforcement works today. For decades, traditional methods kept communities safe and deterred crime through simple yet powerful tactics. These age-old approaches are often seen as the backbone of law enforcement, even as technology and new strategies emerge. Let’s explore the roots of old school policing and how it fits into today’s crime-fighting landscape.

Policing as we know it began in the early 19th century. Cities like London and New York set up the first police departments to maintain order. Back then, crime was dealt with through personal patrols and immediate responses. Society needed police to be visible, so people felt safe and criminals feared getting caught. These early strategies laid the groundwork for modern policing models.

Old school policing focused heavily on physical presence. Officers strolled neighborhoods to watch for trouble. The goal was to be seen, so potential criminals thought twice. Police also used discretion—choosing when to arrest or warn someone based on the situation. Routine patrols were common, and officers relied on their instincts to keep everyone safe.

Two famous models shaped traditional policing. The detective system was used to investigate crimes deeply. Officers became specialists who solved complex cases. Preventive patrols aimed to stop crimes before they happened. These models helped build a police force that focused on crime prevention and investigation, influencing modern practices.

Having officers out on the streets made a big difference. When police cars and officers patrol neighborhoods visibly, crime rates tend to drop. This simple tactic makes criminals think twice because they don’t want to get caught. Many police departments still use this approach today, especially in high-crime areas.

Traditional policing used a mix of actions. Routine patrols, setting up surveillance, and quick response to calls were common. The focus was on stopping crimes before they could happen, making communities feel safer. While reactive measures dealt with crimes after they occurred, proactive tactics aimed to keep trouble from starting.

Old school policing sometimes involves physical force to control situations. Officers use their judgment to decide when force was necessary. For example, an officer might restrain a disorderly person without arresting them. These decisions often depended on the officer’s training and experience, shaping the way policing was carried out.

Visible police patrols have proven effective. Studies show areas with consistent foot or car patrols see fewer crimes like vandalism and theft. The physical presence reassures the public and discourages bad behavior. Many police officers believe that “showing the badge” remains a core part of crime prevention.

Personal interactions matter. When police officers talk with residents regularly, trust builds. These relationships often lead to better cooperation in solving crimes. Communities surrounded by consistent police presence tend to feel safer and more connected.

Traditional methods are straightforward and easy to teach. Officers learned simple procedures like patrolling, arresting, and reporting. During emergencies, clear steps helped officers act fast. This simplicity made training effective and response quick in crucial moments.

Challenges and Criticisms of Traditional Policing

Some communities, especially marginalized groups, felt targeted unfairly. Sometimes, visible policing results in what some perceive to be too many stops and checks. Some neighborhoods feel overwhelmed or unfairly targeted. These can hurt trust and make community members less willing to cooperate with authorities.

Traditional tactics struggle with modern threats like cybercrime or organized crime. They’re designed to combat street-level offenses. When crimes become more sophisticated, old methods sometimes fall short. Many police agencies now combine new tools with classic strategies.

Modern Perspective: Integrating Old School Tactics with Contemporary Approaches

• Data and research now guide many law enforcement decisions. Officers rely on crime stats to focus patrols where trouble is most likely. Traditional methods still fit well with these modern, evidence-driven strategies.

• Today, police focus more on working with communities. Instead of just patrolling, officers join neighborhood meetings and build trust. Combining the personal touch of old school policing with problem-solving helps create safer neighborhoods.

• Modern tools like surveillance cameras and data analytics support traditional patrols. These advancements help officers work more efficiently and stay connected to their communities. The best results come when technology enhances, not replaces, human interaction.

Old school policing remains a vital part of law enforcement today. Its focus on visibility, community trust, and clear procedures can still offer great value. The future of policing depends on balancing tradition with innovation. Real safety comes from seeing police officers out on the streets, building trust, and being adaptable. By combining time-tested strategies with modern tools stronger, safer neighborhoods result. Law enforcement agencies that remember their roots while embracing new methods will best protect and serve their communities.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Quality Of Life Policing -The Sequel

Ever since former New York Police Department police commissioner William Bratton introduced the crime fighting strategy based on the broken windows theory and written about extensively by noted criminologist George Kelling, order maintenance tactics and strategies were at the heart of dramatic crime reductions all across America. Other cities implemented their own version of it.

The theory suggests that minor crimes left unaddressed led to creating an environment that allowed more serious crimes to break out. Most residents are not the victims of violent crimes but everybody sees some form of disorder daily. Residents develop a sense that nobody is addressing things like public urination, public drunkenness, panhandling, turnstile jumping on the subway and street encampments popping up everywhere on sidewalks. A quiet resignation set in where people stopped notifying police about these offenses because police were too busy with serious crime. A big issue at the time was with “squeegee men” who would set up at busy intersections and as traffic stopped, they cleaned a vehicle’s windshield whether the driver wanted it or not. They then asked the driver for payment and if the driver refused, their windshield wipers were damaged. The only way to avoid your car not being damaged was to pay a fee for having their windshield cleaned.

The NYPD wasn’t tending to this extortion nor any of the other quality of life offenses. Then Rudy Guiliani was elected mayor of New York and he hired William Bratton as police commissioner. Things changed with a no-nonsense person leading the NYPD. Along with Jack Maple they put together a crime fighting strategy utilizing computer statistics to track how well things were going. This also made precinct commander accountable for results. Squeegee men and turn style jumpers were the first things they focused on stopping because these were things that everyday New Yorkers could see and were affected by. When people saw the results, they became supportive of this style of policing.

Police commissioners of the NYPD who followed Bratton continued with this strategy. Crime fell precipitously in all categories. New York won several designations as the safest city in America. Then politics crept into this program. Numerous race baiting groups complained that these tactics had a disparate impact and targeted minorities. Never mind that residents in minority neighborhoods were the beneficiary of safer streets and less crime victimization. The police were not targeting people; they were targeting unacceptable social behavior.

The successful bastardization of QOL policing led to its demise over time. A key tactic was not necessarily to make a summary arrest for minor offenses but to issue a summons for a later court date. Most offenders were not going to show up in court and thus a warrant was issued and when the offender was stopped on a field interview contact in the future, an arrest on a warrant could be made. It got the perpetrator of disorder off the street. They were put on notice that their unwanted behavior would no longer be tolerated and it attached consequences.

Bill De Blasio was elected mayor promising to get police to back off of Broken Windows policing and stopping the tactic of stop, question and frisk. The current New York City mayor and a former member of the NYPD did not make attacking crime, violence and disorder a priority after getting elected. That was until now. Eric Adams kept touting crime statistics as proof that the city was safe. Maybe for him it was but New Yorkers are smarter than that. They know a crap sandwich when they see one and surveys were showing that residents did not feel safe. Crime numbers are the wrong metric to use in determining the quality of life in a city. Statistics can be misleading, especially when it comes to major crimes. Most people will go through life never being the victim of a murder, armed robbery or rape. They will however be confronted and frequently by a panhandler, intoxicated street person or somebody mentally ill demonstrating frightening behavior in public spaces. Residents indicate that a sense of chaos has overtaken Gotham City and they want something done about it.

Being up for re-election in 2026, Eric Adams only now wants to do something about it. NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch has recently announced the creation of a Quality of Life Division to crack down on low level crime. Adam as said that this initiative would take public safety, “to the next level.” Really? One must ask why he did not make this effort immediately after being sworn in as New York City mayor?

This appears to be election year politicking. There are several other issues that need to be mentioned. I do not think Tisch who previously was the Commissioner of the sanitation department understands order maintenance policing. Commissioner Tisch needs to tell residents where she is going to get the officers from to do a large-scale push to enforce ordinances and go after perpetrators of disorder. My suggestion is for her to read former NYPD Commissioner William Bratton’s book titled Turnaround where he goes in depth explaining how this strategy works. When he became Commissioner, he asked for and received funding to hire 5,000 additional police officers. They went from having 35,000 cops to 40,000. This matters.

Twice I visited Commissioner Bratton, once in New York and once when he was police chief of Los Angeles to see firsthand how the strategy works. I sat with him and picked his brain on how to implement Broken Windows policing. He emphasized that having enough cops matters. He said he had enough officers to throw at any problem that arose. Tisch does not have that luxury as staffing has fallen well below 40,000 and the hiring cannot keep up with officers retiring and resigning. This mass exodus is the result of the beat down officers and agencies have experienced since the George Floyd era. This is no doubt just an initiative in name only designed to get a splash in the media and nothing more. She does not have the proper numbers to dedicate to order maintenance policing.

Another important question is whether Tisch will have buy in from front line officers. Officers today are hesitant to take risks involving low level offenses in this cop hating environment fearing the loss of their career or facing a criminal charge based off of an interaction with somebody mentally ill who might go off from being stopped or someone who decides to fight causing officers to use force to gain compliance. Remember Eric Garner, a career criminal who was confronted by officers for selling loose cigarettes outside a New York bodega? That is a low-level offense. His death sparked outrage and riots over the use of chokeholds as a technique to control someone resisting arrest. One officer lost his job over this incident. He should not have.

This initiative is already facing backlash from community agitators who claim without foundation that police will target minority and low-income people. This Quality of Life division inside the NYPD needs some more work before being rolled out so that some front-line cop is not put in a career ending situation over a minor offense.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Moving Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

The Impact of the Sympathetic Nervous System on First Responders

By: Joel E. Gordon

The sympathetic nervous system (SNS) is a branch of the autonomic nervous system that controls involuntary bodily functions in response to stress or perceived danger. It prepares the body for the "fight or flight" response.

I can remember that as a newer driver, before my days of public service, the feeling I experienced upon a sudden obstacle in my vehicle’s path, such as a suddenly darting animal in front of me, would result in a rushed feeling of panic (a brief involuntary instant jumpy feeling along with stomach unrest followed by a weakened letdown, is the best description I can muster).

After many emergency responses and potentially violent encounters, I found that I no longer experienced the aforementioned feeling. This was as a result of burnout from too many adrenaline rushes initiating the sympathetic nervous response over a period of time. I am certain many of you know what I am referring to and although my SNS response has somewhat returned in “retirement” it will never be completely restored.

High stress levels among first responders remain a pressing concern. Studies show that these brave professionals experience chronic stress far more than the general population. This stress response largely involves the sympathetic nervous system (SNS), a critical part of how our bodies react to danger and pressure.

Image Source: https://pixabay.com/photos/depression-anxiety-stress-depressed-3912748/

When the SNS activates, the body prepares for a fight-or-flight response. Heart rate increases, blood pressure rises, and breathing becomes rapid. This physiological reaction is essential in life-threatening situations, allowing first responders to act quickly. However, these states of heightened alertness can become problematic.

Statistics reveal that 30% of first responders experience chronic stress-related health issues, including heart disease and diabetes. Research indicates that first responders are more likely to suffer from stress-related illnesses than their peers.

Acute stress occurs in response to immediate threats, such as responding to an emergency. For instance, a firefighter rushing into a burning building experiences acute stress, spurring quick action. However, chronic stress builds over time, resulting from the constant pressure of the job.

For example, dealing with traumatic incidents repeatedly can overwhelm a first responder's ability to cope. Prolonged SNS activation can lead to severe health problems, such as anxiety and heart issues.

Adrenaline and cortisol are crucial in the body's response to stress. Adrenaline boosts energy while cortisol helps manage stress levels over time. However, prolonged exposure to these hormones can lead to hormonal imbalances, increasing the risk of obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular problems. Research shows that first responders often have elevated cortisol levels, which can have serious long-term health effects.

Prolonged activation of the SNS is strongly linked to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Research indicates that 20% to 30% of first responders develop PTSD, often a result of exposure to traumatic events. Experts emphasize the need for greater awareness of how chronic stress affects mental health.

Anxiety and depression are common among first responders. Chronic stress can create a challenging environment where these conditions thrive. For example, a firefighter may experience heightened anxiety after a traumatic call, affecting their personal life and work.

Studies show that nearly 40% of first responders report symptoms of anxiety and depression, highlighting the importance of mental health awareness in this field.

Burnout and compassion fatigue also are significant challenges linked to the SNS. These conditions arise from ongoing stress and emotional exhaustion. Symptoms may include irritability, reduced performance, and detachment from work.

Recognizing these symptoms early can help prevent further decline. Experts suggest coping strategies like setting boundaries and ensuring time for self-care to manage these issues effectively.

Chronic SNS activation is strongly correlated with increased risks of heart disease among first responders. Studies show that first responders are nearly twice as likely to develop heart issues compared to the general population. The stress hormone cortisol can lead to inflammation and other cardiovascular problems.

Stress can also wreak havoc on the digestive system. First responders may face issues like ulcers and irritable bowel syndrome. The link between stress and gastrointestinal problems is well-documented, with research indicating that high-stress jobs increase the likelihood of such health concerns.

Chronic stress can weaken the immune system. This suppression can lead to increased illness rates among first responders. Research shows that they are more susceptible to infections, further complicating their health and recovery.

Mindfulness and meditation can help regulate the SNS response. These practices encourage relaxation and stress reduction. Simple techniques, like focused breathing or guided meditation, can be practiced daily.

Research supports the effectiveness of mindfulness, showing reductions in stress and anxiety levels among participants.

Regular physical activity is vital for managing stress. Exercise releases endorphins, which help boost mood and alleviate stress. First responders can benefit from activities like running, hiking, or team sports. Even a regular walk can significantly reduce stress.

Studies show that those who exercise regularly report lower stress levels and better overall health.

Support networks play a crucial role in mitigating stress. Connecting with colleagues or joining peer support groups can create a sense of belonging and share experiences. Seeking professional help is equally important for those experiencing difficulty managing stress.

Professional therapy offers valuable support for managing stress and PTSD. Techniques like cognitive-behavioral therapy can be particularly beneficial for first responders. Resources are available across the country, providing a pathway to recovery.

Some organizations offer Employee Assistance Programs, which provide confidential support for first responders. These programs can give access to counseling, stress management services, and wellness programs. Utilizing EAPs is a proactive step towards better mental health.

Mental health apps can be accessible tools for support. Options like Headspace or Calm provide guided meditation and mindfulness resources. However, while technology can aid in mental health management, it’s essential to balance its use with personal interactions and professional help.

The impact of the sympathetic nervous system on first responders is profound and multifaceted. Addressing the challenges posed by stress is vital for ensuring their physical and mental well-being. Recognizing symptoms, seeking support, and employing effective coping strategies can significantly enhance health. Prioritizing mental and physical health is not just a personal choice; it’s an essential step towards a healthier community.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Decoding Deception: How to Spot Unreliable Statistics

By: Joel E. Gordon

Garbage in, garbage out; the power and peril of numbers exposed…

Statistics hold a unique power in our lives and are often cited in the reporting and evaluation of criminal activity, crime trends, and deployment of available resources. They help us to understand the possible developing trends, make decisions, and inform our beliefs. However, not all numbers tell the truth. Misleading statistics can steer us in the wrong direction, leading to poor choices and misconceptions. Recognizing which statistics are reliable is crucial for informed decision-making.

Numbers can be persuasive. They often come across as objective and factual. In addition to crime tracking, people rely on statistics when making decisions about health, finance, and overall policy. The more convincing the numbers appear, the more likely they are to influence opinions and behaviors.

When statistics are misleading, the consequences can be serious. Misinterpretations can lead to public panic, misguided policies, and lost opportunities. For instance, incorrect health statistics can result in thousands of people avoiding necessary medical treatments.

Understanding the reliability of statistics empowers you to question and analyze information critically. In a world flooded with data, discernment is key. Knowing how to spot unreliable statistics will help you make better decisions.

SOURCE: https://pixabay.com/photos/statistics-arrows-tendency-business-2899893/

Common Methods of Statistical Manipulation:

• Cherry-Picking Data: Presenting Only Favorable Results. One of the most common tricks in the book is cherry-picking data. This means presenting only the statistics that support a particular viewpoint, while ignoring the rest. This has occurred with federal job creation numbers as well as past reported crime statistics with multiple jurisdictions not in the reporting pool.

• Selective Reporting of Clinical Trial Data: In some clinical trials, researchers may emphasize positive results while neglecting negative outcomes. This selective reporting creates a false sense of effectiveness for remedies. When contradictory evidence is left out, the overall understanding of a topic becomes skewed, potentially causing harm to patients relying on treatments that aren’t as effective as presented.

Visual aids can clarify data, but they can also mislead. Charts and graphs can be manipulated to create false impressions.

Biased samples can significantly impact the reliability of statistics. When a sample isn’t representative, the results become questionable. Online polls often attract specific demographics, skewing results. For instance, younger audiences might dominate an online survey, leaving out older perspectives. Check how samples are selected. Random sampling is often more reliable than targeted sampling, which can miss critical groups.

The way data is collected and analyzed matters. Questionable methodologies can lead to flawed conclusions. Surveys with leading questions can push respondents toward specific answers. For example, asking, “How much do you love our product?” assumes a positive response and can skew results. Review the research methods. Look for clear explanations of how data was collected and analyzed. Transparency is key to trustworthiness.

It’s easy to confuse correlation with causation. Just because two things happen together doesn’t mean one causes the other. Example: Ice Cream Sales and Drowning Incidents… An increase in ice cream sales often coincides with rising drowning incidents during summer. However, this doesn’t mean ice cream causes drowning. Both are linked to warmer weather. Be aware of spurious correlations that mislead analysis. Look deeper into the data before concluding that one thing causes or has a connection to another.

Establishing causality requires more than coincidence. It often involves controlled experiments. Controlled experiments isolate variables to assess effects accurately. This method is essential for solid conclusions, especially in medical studies. Always consider confounding variables that could impact results. If not accounted for, they can misrepresent relationships and skew findings.

Knowing where data comes from is crucial. Credible sources provide transparency and reliability. Evaluate the authority of a source by checking the expertise of its contributors. Look for potential biases that could impact objectivity. Not all data sources are reliable. Recognizing questionable presentations is vital for critical evaluation.

Watch out for sensationalist headlines that exaggerate claims. They often distort statistics to attract attention, undermining credibility. Investigate how data is presented. Reliable sources clarify their methodologies and limitations, providing a fuller picture.

Every statistic is based on certain assumptions. Challenge these assumptions to develop a better understanding. Sometimes, analyses make assumptions that aren't clearly stated. Identify these to assess credibility accurately. Look for biases in interpretations. Question whether the data is being used to support a specific agenda.

Don’t take statistics at face value. Cross-reference data to build a clearer picture. Look for inconsistencies across different sources. If something doesn’t add up, seek clarity.

To navigate the world of statistics, develop skills to critically assess data. Learn to spot manipulation and bias. Maintain a healthy skepticism. Always verify information independently to guard against deception. Empower yourself with knowledge. Understanding how to evaluate statistics can protect you against misleading information. Make informed decisions based on solid data and not statistical deception.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Time For A Talk

The election and swearing in of Donald Trump as President have caused a schism among some executives in law enforcement. Trump made immigration enforcement a major plank in his platform. He also campaigned on full throated support for police and safer streets when it wasn’t popular to do so after the death of George Floyd. He was very open about what he was going to do. He did not conceal his true objective like many politicians and people running for office do. Everybody knew it was coming, having experienced some of it during his first term, so voters had something to go on as to whether or not to vote for him. And they did.

The second President Trump term has started in earnest, and it has caused some consternation among law enforcement executives. As a former law enforcement executive and an elected one at that, I understand the nuances of dealing with diverse communities that have divergent views. I had respect for the fact that there are other elected officials with constituencies. Ours is a system of shared powers. It can be difficult to navigate. My reputation was a balls to the wall hard liner on crime, violence and disorder and a staunch supporter of gun rights. I was this way in a very liberal county. Nevertheless, I was elected and re-elected four times. I had to survive contentious elections. How did I win? By staying true to my oath to the Constitution and keeping my community safe. The rest I left to the other elected officials to argue over. I made it publicly clear that I set policy for my office and did not allow other county officials to interfere. I did everything I could to keep pure politics out. It was not always possible as just about everything involving law enforcement has been made political, especially after George Floyd. Today, illegal immigration is doing the same thing.

Whether or not to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in their quest to locate, arrest and deport people in this country illegally is highly contentious. This is where the divide has occurred. Some sheriffs and police chiefs are assisting, others are not. There is no doubt that immigration is a federal responsibility, and local cities and states have no obligation to assist. But wait a minute. Federal illegal drug laws and aspects of violent crime and sex trafficking have shared responsibility implications. Many local law enforcement agencies team up with federal officers to form task forces to combat these offenses. Local officers are trained and then deputized as deputy US Marshals giving them the authority to enforce federal law. So how is that any different when it comes to assisting ICE agents in pursuit of dangerous illegal alien criminals? We are talking about transnational gang members now operation in the United States. We are talking about violent criminal gangs that have been accused of murder, rape and other assaults against American citizens. Many of these violent criminals have previously been arrested locally and then released only to victimize American citizens once again. Law enforcement executives always talk about the role that recidivism plays in violent crime but don’t seem concerned about it when those illegally in the country engage in criminal recidivism.

Then there is the issue that has long been used when it comes to Hispanic communities. It is the belief that assisting ICE will create mistrust between Latinos and police who will then begin to not report crimes to police out of fear that it will be discovered that they are in the country illegally and might be deported. Let’s walk through that myth. Yes, I said myth. I have never seen a police document or survey with empirical data citing real numbers of unreported crime due to mistrust of police.

Let us go back to right after September 11, 2002. There was this fear that there were terror cells operations in the US. A public campaign was started that had local law enforcement investigations and searches for potential terrorists in Muslim communities all across the US. They called it see something, say something. Where was the concern by local law enforcement that this might create mistrust in those communities and leading Muslims therefore to not report crime? Or did that not matter because there was a bigger goal of uprooting terrorists? It is a known proven fact that law enforcement’s relationship in black communities across the country is one of mistrust. Police have been on an unending pursuit to gain trust with black folks but to no avail. The approach by law enforcement in the black community is not to leave criminals there. They arrest those who prey on law abiding black people to make the community more livable. They don’t worry about it leading to more distrust or citizens not reporting crime out of fear of retaliation from criminals.

Why then would police executives want to allow dangerous criminal illegal aliens with known gang affiliations suspected of murder, rape, robbery and generally terrorizing lawful citizens to remain in Hispanic communities? In fact, I find it contradictory.

State and local law enforcement have the right not to assist ICE officials in identifying and arresting criminal illegal aliens, but it doesn’t square with that principle of the law enforcement code of ethics that says, I will cooperate with all legally authorized agencies and their representatives in the pursuit of justice.

Not working with ICE officials makes this political, and the antithesis of ethical conduct.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Understanding the Horrific Reality of Child Sex Trafficking

By: Joel E. Gordon

"Child sex trafficking has no place in the United States of America. And I will do everything, if confirmed as FBI director, to make sure the American public knows the full weight of what happened in the past and how we are going to counterman missing children and exploited children going forward." - Kash Patel

Every year, millions of children fall victim to child sex trafficking, an issue that plagues countries around the globe. According to the International Labor Organization, approximately 1.2 million children are trafficked each year for sexual exploitation. Child sex trafficking involves the illegal trade of children for sexual purposes, resulting in a devastating impact on their well-being and future. Addressing this urgent issue is vital. This article aims to shed light on the tactics used by traffickers, the vulnerable populations at risk, the devastating impact on victims, and actionable steps we can all take to combat this crisis.

Traffickers often use grooming and manipulation to lure children into their webs. They build trust gradually, pretending to be friends. For example, on social media, they might engage in conversations, offering gifts or help. Research shows that these methods can lower a child’s defenses, making them easier targets. Reports reveal that some children may form emotional bonds with their traffickers, believing they are in a loving relationship.

Once involved, many children face coercion and control tactics. Traffickers may use threats, violence, or even manipulate family members to keep their victims trapped. A notable case involved a young girl who was threatened with harm to her family if she attempted to escape. Such control tactics leave victims feeling powerless, often leading them to risk everything for their safety.

SOURCE: https://pixabay.com/photos/park-playing-catch-kids-children-6688951/

Technology plays a significant role in facilitating child sex trafficking. Social media platforms, encrypted messaging apps, and the dark web provide traffickers with easy access to potential victims. Instances like the arrest of a trafficker using a popular app to lure teens highlight the dangers of technology. Awareness of these tactics is crucial in spotting and reporting suspicious activity.

Technology plays a significant role in facilitating child sex trafficking. Social media platforms, encrypted messaging apps, and the dark web provide traffickers with easy access to potential victims. Instances like the arrest of a trafficker using a popular app to lure teens highlight the dangers of technology. Awareness of these tactics is crucial in spotting and reporting suspicious activity.

Poverty and lack of education increase the risk of child sex trafficking. Children living in impoverished conditions are often more vulnerable. According to recent statistics from UNICEF, children from low-income families are significantly at risk. NGOs report that traffickers specifically target these children, promising them a better life.

Orphaned and abandoned children face heightened vulnerability. They often lack adult support systems, making them easy targets. Successful interventions, such as community outreach programs, have shown promise in protecting these at-risk youth. Reuniting them with support services helps reduce their chances of falling victim.

Runaway and homeless youth are also at high risk of trafficking. According to the National Runaway Safeline, about one in three runaway youths are approached by a trafficker within 48 hours of leaving home. The lack of safe shelter and resources makes these young people particularly susceptible.

The trauma of child sex trafficking leaves many lasting scars. Survivors often experience severe physical and mental health issues. Studies show that over 50% of child trafficking survivors suffer from PTSD, anxiety disorders, and depression. The long-term consequences can include chronic pain and other health problems.

Reintegrating into society poses significant challenges for survivors. Many face stigma, lack education, and struggle to find employment. Support services, like job training programs and counseling, help survivors rebuild their lives. Success stories from these programs highlight the resilience of survivors when given proper resources.

Trafficking can create a cycle of trauma that affects not only survivors but also their families. Research indicates that trauma can be intergenerational; meaning children of survivors may also face issues related to abuse and neglect. Breaking this cycle is critical for lasting change.

Public awareness and education play key roles in preventing trafficking. Campaigns such as "Blue Campaign" in the U.S. educate communities on recognizing child trafficking signs. Effective programs foster discussions and teach families how to protect their children.

Stronger laws and improved investigations are crucial in combating child sex trafficking. Data shows that regions with robust legal frameworks see higher prosecution rates for traffickers. Laws like the Trafficking Victims Protection Act have been instrumental in enhancing law enforcement's response to trafficking cases.

Comprehensive support services for survivors are essential. This includes medical care, psychological counseling, and legal assistance. Programs that focus on holistic care have demonstrated effectiveness in helping survivors heal and reintegrate into society.

You can help by supporting reputable organizations dedicated to fighting child sex trafficking. Donating time or money to groups like Polaris or the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children can make a real difference.

Educate yourself about the signs of trafficking and share this information with your community. Resources from organizations like the U.S. Department of Homeland Security can provide ways to identify and report suspected trafficking cases.

Contact your elected officials to advocate for stronger anti-trafficking legislation. Resources like Vote.org can guide you on how to reach out and express your concerns about child sexual exploitation.

The severity of child sex trafficking cannot be overstated. Collective action is urgently needed to combat this issue. Awareness, prevention, and survivor support are vital components in this battle. Every step—big or small—counts. Together, we can make a difference in the fight against child sex trafficking and protect the most vulnerable among us. Our children must be protected and never be for sale.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Chasing Out the Police

By: Joel E. Gordon

"Let cops be cops" - Kash Patel

SOURCE: https://pixabay.com/photos/police-officers-security-authority-4331483/

In 2021, in response to the death of George Floyd, the Maryland Legislature repealed its Police Bill of Rights. The sweeping police reform bill stipulates force can be used only to prevent “an imminent threat of physical injury” to a person or to “effectuate a legitimate law enforcement objective.” It also upgraded the standard for using force from “reasonable” to “necessary and proportional.”

For every thoughtful state, in conformance to established case precedent and law, the standard for police use of force is reasonableness. What would a reasonable police officer do under like circumstances where threats of harm are perceived based upon professional first-hand analysis?

Washington, D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) cited recent changes in Maryland’s use-of-force policy as to why multiple law enforcement agencies were reported as being unable to assist with security for the 2025 presidential inauguration ceremonies.

Just days before the inauguration, seven Maryland-based police departments declared that they would not be working with MPD, despite having assisted with security in the nation’s capital in previous years. At least one department, the Montgomery County Police Department, revealed it was due to issues with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the departments. Some of these departments, including those in Anne Arundel County and Prince George’s County, as well as Maryland State Police, said they would be assisting the United States Capitol Police instead.

In a statement from D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department it was said that “Due to differences in the interpretation of Maryland’s recent legislation on Use of Force compared to the District of Columbia’s Use of Force policies, some Maryland agencies are unable to assist MPD directly for the inauguration.”

“Necessary and proportional” allows Monday Morning Quarterback types to review officer’s actions in the most narrow and punitive light including legislators, politicians and even some police executives who are overtly biased when it comes to issues of officer safety versus the intent of offenders to cause harm.

And if that wasn’t enough to prevent Maryland cops from doing their jobs, Maryland law states that officers who violate the use-of-force standard and cause serious injury or death can face up to ten-years in prison. Former Republican Governor Larry Hogan vetoed the legislation but was overridden by the Maryland General Assembly on April 10, 2021.

So Maryland police who are found to have violated that use-of-force standard as determined by police-hating bureaucrats and prosecutors can face spending a decade in prison. Understanding that lawfully doing their jobs could result in this; officers have shifted to avoidance of this personal liability.

These leftover policies resulting from the past anti-police defund the police, and overly restrictive consent decree craze of the recently waning era remain as inhibitors of the full return to law and order.

We must work to overcome past lunacy and allow “cops to be cops” in an environment of respect, protection, and appreciation for professionalism.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Yes We Can!

Pardon me for hijacking a phrase made popular by the cop hater in chief, former president Barack Obama as he campaigned for office in 2008. It is very appropriate however in what I am about to write about.

When Obama became president, he appointed a cop hating Attorney General, Eric Holder who spent 8 years on a jihad against local police agencies and their officers. Commencing pattern and practice investigations caused a ripple effect where cops pulled back their efforts to fight crime. This caused residents to lose faith in law enforcement’s ability to prevent and control crime and keep communities safe. More and more residents and businesses stopped reporting crime or coming forward as witnesses as response times grew longer and calls to 9-1-1 centers went unanswered.

Crime fighting is an activity. It is not a passive state. We need to have officers be on offense in an assertive fashion to keep criminals on the run. One of the tenets of broken windows policing is to displace crime from your beat, your sector or precinct and into the next. If the police in a neighboring area are policing assertively, criminals will not find it as a safe haven either to conduct their illegal operations. The goal is make them feel squeezed to where they have fewer opportunities to commit crime. Opportunity is one of the elements necessary for a crime to occur. Arrests and prosecutions ensure that the perpetrators are kept off the streets. Falling crime rates usually follow. This order maintenance strategy stopped at the state and local level. Effective tactics like stop, question and frisk were demonized as intentionally racially based. Never mind that black males were disproportionally committing the violent crime and even the non violent crime that neighborhoods were experiencing. No bail policies were enacted. It was an era of pro criminal policies. That era is coming to an end with President Trump.

The election of the most pro police president in the last half century began in 2016. It stopped under President Biden. It has been renewed with the re-election of Donal J Trump. We can confidently say that there is a new sheriff in town once again.

Renowned researcher and author Heather Mac Donald, a Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the think tank Manhattan Institute, is the preeminent authority on policing in America in my view. Her many columns focus on urban crime, its causes and remedies to control and prevent it. In a recent post she pointed out that most of the urban crime we see is the result of failed progressive policies by state and local elected officials. She indicates that Trump and his new attorney general Pam Bondi are limited as to the effect they can have on local policing. She points out that, Trump cannot order district attorneys in New York or elsewhere to prosecute low-level crimes or seek long sentences for repeat offenders or pay attention to public disorder. This may be true, however I will offer a strategy that will yield tremendous results in reducing incidents of crime, violence and disorder at the local level.

Let me take a page from Border Czar Tom Homan’s strategy on tackling the enormous undertaking of removing the estimated twenty million people illegally in the country. He is starting with removing the criminal element first. I suggest a reverse of the Broken Windows philosophy. This theory is premised on working on the lower level incidents of disorder like misdemeanors, vandalism and other nuisance crimes with the belief that it will ultimately trickle up and reduce violent crime. The reverse of Broken Windows has police focus on going after the most serious violent offenders first. Why?

As Ms. Mac Donald pointed out, the feds cannot do much to prosecute low level offenses but they can use their vast resources to prosecute violent offenders. This was done with initiatives like Project Safe Neighborhood and Project Triggerlock in the nineties where task forces were set up with local, state and federal officers focusing on going after violent offenders, gang and drug dealers.  A prosecution task force of local prosecutors and  US Attorneys obtained federal indictments subjecting perps to be prosecuted in federal court. Using tools like the Armed Career Criminal Act that deters recidivism and Felon In Possession Of A Firearm and the Racketeering statute make prosecution more certain. If found guilty in federal court or in a plea agreement, they faced mandatory minimum sentencing under the federal code. This meant they faced more certain sentencing with longer prison in a federal institution far away from where they lived. It also meant more consistent sentencing. Mandatory minimum sentencing takes away watered down sentences and placement on probation. Crime during the nineties dropped precipitously during this period.

This new attitude of no tolerance for gun crime and gang and drug crime will send an effective deterrence message to lower level offenders. Keep in mind that most people starting out on a career criminal path do so by committing lower level offense eventually progressing on to committing more serious crime. Now they will know what lies ahead on this criminal career trajectory instead of the soft on crime approach in low level crimes that sends a message that no one will punish you for your unwanted behavior.

Another option that AG Bondi has at her disposal is to notify all state and local law enforcement that all federal dollars must be spent on crime fighting activities. Every dollar has to prevent and reduce crime. State and local agencies receive millions in federal subsidies to fill out budget shortfalls. She should suspend all dollars being spent on useless community policing activities and direct them toward crime fighting activities. It is time to end this nonsense that community policing activities help anything. The best way to improve relationships with communities, especially in crime ridden minority neighborhoods is to reduce crime, violence and disorder. Making people feel safe in their homes, schools and on their streets is how you regain the trust of the community.

Yes we can do this. The question is not how. It is whether local agencies and elected officials have the will.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Scrutinizing Preemptive Pardons

By: Joel E. Gordon

The founding fathers of the United States of America set up a republic comprised of three equal branches of government to provide checks and balances over authoritarian rule. The concern was that when executive authority is absolute then a king is born. Preemptive pardons facilitate exactly what our forefathers designed a system to prevent.

Can a US president pardon US citizens who have not yet been convicted of a crime? Is a "preemptive" pardon in conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause which guarantees procedural due process as to determination of guilt or innocence thereby violating this rightful opportunity?

A pardon, which is the use of executive power to help its recipient to avoid punishment, is granted under Article II of the U.S. Constitution. Under the Constitution, the president’s clemency power extends to all federal criminal offenses – except impeachment. The president’s clemency power does not extend to a civil, state, or local offense. This begs the question of whether a Presidential pardon means that the recipient is acknowledging that he or she is guilty of their original charge(s).

In the 1833 case of United States v. Wilson, the Supreme Court ruled that a pardon could be rejected by the convict. According to the landmark Supreme Court case Burdick v. United States -  236 U.S. 79 (1915), accepting a pardon "carries an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it. Due to the findings in the 1915 case, Burdick v. United States, it seems as though accepting a pardon is, in fact, admitting guilt. In Burdick the appellant was offered a pardon but declined it, also refusing to testify in criminal court. The opinion of the case given by the justices seemed to uncover that 1) a pardon can be given before a conviction and sentence; 2) a pardon can be refused, and 3) acceptance of a pardon implies acceptance of guilt. This precedent clarifies that a pardon is not a magical exoneration but a legal acknowledgment of culpability.

The more recent preemptive pardon of Richard Nixon is largely considered as his admission to guilt for crimes he committed due to his acceptance. In fact, President Gerald R. Ford for many years after leaving office in 1977, carried in his wallet a scrap of a 1915 Supreme Court ruling. A pardon, the excerpt said, “carries an imputation of guilt,” and acceptance of a pardon is “a confession of it.

When someone receives a presidential pardon, it restores a variety of the rights that were lost due to the pardoned offense. However, if someone refuses a pardon it simply will not take effect. It’s important to understand that there are major differences between legislative immunity and a pardon such as... The acceptance of a pardon imputes guilt, while legislative immunity does no such thing. 

In Lorrance v. Commandant, USDB, the 10th circuit found that accepting a pardon does not confess to anything and does not preclude the recipient from petitioning for habeas corpus relief from his or her court-martial conviction and sentence thereby ruling that a presidential pardon does not denote innocence or change an existing conviction. Rather, it represents forgiveness so when one accepts a presidential pardon, he or she is not admitting guilt or waiving habeas rights. It remains unseen as to whether or not our Department of Justice will petition the Supreme Court to get a final answer. But make no mistake; a pardon was originally intended to absolve someone from the consequences of an actual offense or crime. 

If preemptive pardons are deemed to be lawful then what's to prevent another President from preemptively pardoning their cabinet members insulating them from any breach to the rule of law and giving full and complete status to being effectively "above the law" and free from any consequence?

I believe that preemptive pardons if not ultimately halted by the Supreme Court will set a very dangerous precedent; especially if the sole purpose is to circumvent the law to begin with. On the verge of our country's 250-year anniversary, I will place my trust that the great American experiment will be on track to endure as our brilliant founding father’s intended it to be.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

All Hands on Deck

The inauguration of Donald Trump as the 47th President of the United States ushers in a period of law and order in cities across America. Trump was first elected in 2016 on a platform that included support for local police at a time when the war on police was raging in Democrat controlled cities. His support was not just a typical campaign promise that most people running for president proclaim and once elected, don’t fulfill the promise. Donald Trump actually followed through. It was at the time not the most popular thing for a politician to do.  Even Republican  legislators who in the past had supported police, hid under their desks hoping not to be identified as a cop supporter at election time. Trump never backed off, in fact he got louder about supporting police.

Another aspect of Trump’s support for police  was demonstrated in calling on urban cities to fight crime more assertively and promised federal help with added resources to do so. Woke prosecutors were elected with George Soros funded money after Trump got elected. They made it clear that they were more interested in going after cops than they were going after criminals. No-bail policies were enacted. Catch and release became the norm and criminal prosecutions plummeted.  Officers in record numbers began leaving departments. Cops were taking early retirement and even outright resigning. Recruitment could not keep up with the loss of officers. The criminal element ruled the streets.

Then Joe Biden was elected the 46th President of the U.S. He jump started the Department of Justice practice of going after police departments with pattern and practice investigations. It was federal control of urban police departments that began under then President Barack Obama. Onerous reporting and useless data collection for the USDOJ bogged officers with paperwork that took them away from doing actual police work. It took officers away from patrols and police presence in high crime areas. Crime began an uptick. Then a new facet of crime was introduced into American cities. Migrant crime.

The Biden Administration embarked on a policy of open borders. What followed was inevitable. Criminals from Latin American countries began coming across the border. We were assured by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas that everybody coming in was being properly vetted. Whistle blowers in border patrol reported that this was not the case. These illegal border crossers who were caught were processed and released into American cities. Agents were told to just get them through. Then the inevitable happened.

Reports of violent crime by migrants including rape, robbery, assaults and murder began popping up. A news report indicated that over 13,000 immigrants convicted of homicide either inside of the U.S. or abroad were roaming the streets in the United States. A notorious Venezuelan criminal prison gang, Tren de Aragua armed themselves and began taking over neighborhoods. They involved themselves in the illegal street drug trade to support themselves. When this became public, a few Democrat politicians tried to downplay what was going on even when some of the incidents were videotaped and shown on TV. This tolerance for migrant crime is one of the issues that led to Donal Trump being re-elected last November. Once again Trump made securing the border and deporting illegals a main plank in his platform.

So President Trump is back and like the first time he served as President, he is following through on his promises. He appointed a Border Czar, Tom Homan a former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Homan  indicated that they would target the criminals and deport them first along with finding the over 300,000 missing children brought into the country under the Biden, Harris and Myorkas administration.

Locating the criminals for deportation is going to be an arduous task. Ideally ICE would need the help of local law enforcement. Homan has made it clear however that ICE will get this done with or without help from local officials There are over 150,00 local law enforcement officers in the country. They are familial with the landscape locally. They could be an invaluable tool in locating the criminal illegals.

Local, state and federal law enforcement have always worked together to accomplish an objective. The issue of illegal immigration however has introduced politics into the equation. So law enforcement is at a crossroads. Numerous big city police executives are digging their heels in and pronouncing that’s they will not work with ICE to help round up criminal illegals for deportation. Border Czar Homan has threatened anyone directly getting in the way of their work with arrest and that federal funding will be withheld to any city or state that continues with declaring themselves as a sanctuary haven for illegals.

I find the position of these police executives and some sheriffs highly contradictory to their oaths of office not to mention that I find it unconscionable. They are insinuating that they will risk and endanger the safety and security of their law citizens by allowing criminal illegal aliens to remain in their jurisdiction to potentially continue to prey upon and victimize lawful citizens to achieve a political agenda.

I am reminded of the Policing Code of Ethics put out by the International Association of Chiefs of Police. It begins by saying, as a sworn officer, my fundamental duty is to serve the community by safeguarding lives and property against threats that could take advantage of or harm members of my community or otherwise impact law and order. It also states that… I will seek to identify and apprehend offenders professionally and appropriately holding them to account. And furthermore it says, I will cooperate with all legally authorized agencies and their representatives in the pursuit of justice.

Either these law enforcement executives believe in ethical conduct or there is an ethics gap. How do they square that with the front lone officers who they demand excellence from? I want to remind these executives that they need to lead by example. Stop politicizing policing or soon your officers will follow your lead.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Fentanyl and Law Enforcement: Tackling the Threat

By: Joel E. Gordon

Fentanyl is a powerful synthetic opioid. It’s 50 to 100 times stronger than morphine. This might sound like medical jargon, but let’s put it simply: a tiny amount of fentanyl can lead to a big overdose. It’s often mixed with other drugs, making it even deadlier. Imagine being sold a soda that looks just like your favorite drink but has an explosive surprise inside; that’s what’s happening on the streets.

Fentanyl is often pressed into pills resembling common prescription opioids, such as Percocet and oxycodone. It is often extremely difficult to distinguish the counterfeit pills from the authentic pills.

In recent years, fentanyl has become a leading cause of overdose deaths across the U.S. The numbers are staggering. Every day, families are torn apart as they lose loved ones to this invisible killer. It’s not just the users at risk; it’s their friends, families, and communities that feel the impact. When a person overdoses, the ripples spread wide, affecting everyone around them.

Law enforcement agencies are on the front lines of this crisis facing a tough battle against drug trafficking. Imagine trying to catch a thief who’s always one step ahead; that’s what police deal with when it comes to fentanyl. They work to intercept shipments, make arrests, and dismantle drug networks. But the challenge is enormous. Fentanyl is often produced in underground labs, making it hard to track its origins. However, NBC News reported that Chinese criminal groups were laundering drug money for the Mexican cartels on an unprecedented scale. The same Chinese brokers who were laundering fentanyl proceeds were now heavily involved in marijuana trafficking across the U.S. as well.

Cops are getting educated on fentanyl’s dangers. This means learning how to recognize signs of overdose and understanding the risks associated with exposure. They often carry Narcan, a drug that can reverse opioid overdoses in just minutes. Without Narcan, many lives would be lost simply because the officers weren’t prepared.

Another strategy is teamwork. Local police, federal agents, and health officials are joining forces. It’s like assembling a squad to tackle a villain; together, they can tackle the fentanyl crisis more effectively. This collaborative approach helps pool resources, share intelligence, and create comprehensive strategies to attack the problem from multiple angles.

Communities also should play a major role in fighting fentanyl. It’s not just a job for law enforcement; every person can make a difference. Awareness campaigns can educate the public about the dangers of fentanyl. Think of it as spreading the word about a fire in your neighborhood—if everyone knows, they can take steps to protect themselves.

Fentanyl isn’t just a law enforcement issue; it’s a community crisis that requires collective action. As this drug continues to pose a serious threat, it’s critical for everyone to stay informed and engaged. By working together, law enforcement and the community can push back against the fentanyl tide, saving lives and restoring hope.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

INDISPENSABLE: Police Command Presence

By: Joel E. Gordon

Picture Source: https://pixabay.com/photos/police-officers-security-authority-4331475/

“Command presence” is often discussed in the police academy and stays with the officer for the rest of his or her career. Command presence refers to when an officer enters a situation and projects authority in a professional way which is particularly important in law enforcement to achieve situational dominance. Police Command Presence can also refer to the entire professional gamut of law enforcement operations as well.

Police presence can make a real difference in community safety. A study found that when police are visible, crime rates can drop by as much as 20%. This statistic highlights the importance of police command presence in maintaining order and ensuring public safety. In this context, police command presence refers to the visible and proactive measures taken by law enforcement to prevent crime and build community trust.

The theory behind visible policing is simple: when officers are present, crime is less likely to happen. Areas with an increased police presence often see a significant decrease in crime rates. For example, in cities that implemented high-visibility patrols, violent crime fell by 15% over just a year. This shows how crucial a strong command presence can be in deterring criminal activity.

Community-oriented policing builds strong ties between police and the communities they serve. This partnership fosters trust and can lead to lower crime rates. A successful illustration is the “Coffee with Cops” program in various cities, where officers meet residents in informal settings. These interactions create positive relationships and encourage community members to report suspicious activity.

Data analysis is key in optimizing police deployment. By examining crime data, departments can determine the areas that need more officers. A report from the Police Executive Research Forum revealed that cities using data-driven policing see up to a 30% reduction in crime in targeted areas. This evidence illustrates how strategic command presence can make a significant impact on crime rates.

Strategically deploying officers is essential for maximizing their impact. Departments can use various models, such as hot-spot policing, where officers are stationed in areas with high crime rates. These models allow law enforcement to be present where they are needed most, improving community safety.

Technology enhances command presence. Tools like body cameras and crime mapping software provide officers with vital information and help keep accountability high. For instance, the Los Angeles Police Department uses crime mapping to allocate resources more effectively. This approach not only increases their presence but also reassures community members of their safety.

Collaboration is vital for a comprehensive command presence. Police departments can work with schools, community organizations, and local businesses to create a safer environment. An example is the partnership between police and schools in the Safe Schools program, which has effectively reduced juvenile crime by engaging students in positive activities.

To assess the impact of command presence, departments must analyze crime statistics. Metrics like the number of reported crimes, response times, and clearance rates can provide valuable insights. Tracking these numbers over time helps identify trends and areas for improvement.

Public perception is equally important. Surveys and community forums can gauge the level of trust residents have in law enforcement. Research indicates that communities with higher police visibility experience increased trust and cooperation. Understanding community sentiments is crucial for adjusting strategies and maintaining positive relationships.

While command presence is essential, officer safety and well-being cannot be overlooked. Programs that focus on mental health support and wellness initiatives help officers perform their duties effectively. Departments like the New York Police Department have implemented such programs, leading to healthier and more effective officers.

Effective command presence requires financial resources. Proper budgeting is essential to ensure that departments can provide adequate staffing and technology. For instance, a small town in Michigan allocated funds specifically for increased patrols, which resulted in a 25% reduction in overall crime rates.

Building trust in communities with strained relationships is a challenge. Departments can host community events and engage residents in discussions to improve relations. Strategies such as using community liaisons can also bridge gaps and foster understanding.

Proactive policing focuses on preventing crime before it happens, while reactive policing responds to incidents after they occur. Emphasizing proactive strategies can enhance command presence by addressing issues before they escalate.

Emerging technologies like predictive policing and artificial intelligence have the potential to reshape command presence. These tools can help departments allocate resources more efficiently; ensuring officers are present where they are most needed.

Strong community partnerships are essential for a safe environment. Collaborations between police, residents, and local organizations create a unified front against crime and foster a sense of security.

Understanding police command presence is crucial for crime prevention and community safety. By implementing effective strategies and measuring success through crime statistics and public perception, departments can enhance their command presence. Building strong community relationships and addressing ethical concerns further improves trust. Engaging in discussions about public safety and police presence helps create safer communities for all.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Be Careful What You Ask For

Much has been made about traffic stop data by police haters who claim that this activity disparately affects black motorists. They even go as far as to say that black motorists are intentionally targeted. Of course, these agitators present no statistically valid or legal argument, instead they simply throw out inflammatory rhetoric to stir up racial animosity. Law enforcement agencies are easy to pick on because most executives do not have the courage to defend their front-line officers by aggressively refuting these smears and calling out the accusers for spewing their trash.

Traffic stops are an effective and lawful police activity that can be shown by research to control crime and supports vehicular safety. The United States Supreme Court has opined that a vehicle stop for even a minor traffic violation falls under the seizure element of the fourth amendment. The only thing necessary for police intervention regarding this seizure is whether the stop is reasonable under the circumstances. The fact that an articulable law violation occurred is enough to validate the stop. Minor violations are referred to as pretextual stops by officers to look for other law violations as they investigate. Criminal defense lawyers and race baiters do not like this and whine about it in court trying to get charges dismissed. Most courts do not buy it because the law on these stops is settled law.

In Whren v. United States, a case decided by the United States Supreme Court, the Justices in a unanimous decision decided that detention of a motorist is reasonable where probable cause exists to believe a traffic violation occurred because Government has a compelling interest in traffic safety. Rarely are cases before the U.S. Supreme Court decided unanimously. They felt that strongly about this. And they did not stop there. They said that the “subjective intent of the officer does not invalidate the probable cause element in Fourth Amendment analysis.” Was the stop reasonable is the only thing that matters.

I mention this because there has been a sea change in terms of municipality and law enforcement agency policies when engaging in traffic enforcement. City administrators are seeing it as an opportunity to flaunt their racial sensitivity. In several cities, the police chiefs are handcuffing officers on their own volition from pro-active policing. It is flat out a social engineering experiment to create equity. That is disgusting.

The Denver, Colorado police chief, to eliminate racial disparity in crime fighting, now prohibits his officers from making traffic stops for minor violations unless there is a second reason like a more serious crime connected with it or in response to a specific ongoing crime trend in a particular neighborhood. What? Let’s look at the results.

Traffic stops plunged 50% in Denver in the first four months after the policy went into effect. In the month after that, stops fell by 59%. Car crashes have increased while crash fatalities have decreased. Citation revenue has predictably decreased as well. I do not know if there is a correlation. Just because two things happen at one time does not mean that one caused the other. The chief says that the decrease is working on decreasing pre-textual stops. I wonder if the policy was working as the chief proclaimed or if officers figured why bother making traffic stops? Also, there is not enough of a sample size to know at this point. The head of the union representing front line officers criticizes the policy because it limits the ability of officers to pull over vehicles for traffic violations and leaves offenders in the community. I wholeheartedly concur.

Traffic stops yield a treasure trove of criminal activity. People wanted on serious felony warrants can be discovered. Illegal drugs can found as can people possessing prohibited firearms who are going to or leaving drive-by shootings and street robberies. They transport these firearms in vehicles.

I have always stood against police agencies being used by city officials to generate revenue. A law enforcement agency is not a revenue generating unit of government. Obviously while enforcing traffic violations revenue will be generated but that is not the goal. The goal is the safe movement of vehicular traffic. I had to remind the Milwaukee County board of that when they complained to me at one meeting that citation revenue was down. I said so what? So were crashes and fatalities and that is our goal.

Then there is the story about the New Jersey State Police. Seems that Troopers were writing fewer and fewer traffic citations. Then tickets for speeding, drunk driving and other offenses fell by 81%. This continued for eight months. This slowdown caught the eye of New Jersey attorney who began a criminal investigation. What? I just mentioned that in Denver, officers were being directed to stop writing traffic citations. Now in New Jersey, troopers are being criminally investigated for a slowdown in writing tickets.

According to one news story the slowdown began after a release of a report found glaring racial disparities in enforcement. The agency is under a federal consent decree for alleged patterns of racial bias. So, which is it? Not enough activity or too much?

When officers are told that they are not writing enough traffic enforcement tickets, that is a de facto quota. Quota enforcement has been prohibited. In the case of the New Jersey State Troopers, what is the benchmark number that officers are being held to and who sets that number? Should all officers achieve the same amount?

All this social engineering with law enforcement frustrates officers. There might in fact be a quiet resignation in citation writing. I do not blame them. That is not criminal. If you want to call it a work slow down, fine. That is still not criminal. I still support it. You cannot on one hand accuse them of racial bias for writing too many citations and then blast them when ticket totals fall off like in New Jersey. In Denver the chief hails the decrease in enforcement as a success and in New Jersey, troopers are criminally investigated for the decreased activity. Make up your mind please.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com