Connect with us

Two Americas

Grand Rapids Considers Making it Illegal to Call Police With So-Called Racist Intent

The ordinance could make it illegal to contact police if they believe the call was racist in nature.

Published

on

Grand Rapids Illegal Call Police

Grand Rapids, Michigan is considering making it illegal to call the police if it is done with racist intent.

The Grand Rapids city commission is considering whether to add a new ordinance that would make it illegal to call police on “people of color” for merely “participating in their lives,” making it a criminal misdemeanor to call the police against African Americans if it is done by mistake.

Local media reports that the “bias crime reporting prohibition” will criminalize contacting police to report possible crimes committed by African Americans if it is found there is no crime occurring.

Trending: Female Christian ‘Pastor’ Rejects the Truth of Christ, Says It is ‘Holy’ to Sell Porn Pics on OnlyFans

Authorities claim it is not to prevent people from contacting police, but merely to encourage citizens to “check their bias” before contacting emergency services.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“Call the police, but if you’re calling because your neighbors are having a barbecue and you’re calling because of some implicit bias because they’re people of color, we don’t want to see that,” said Diversity and Inclusion Manager Patti Caudill.

They say the ordinance may be necessary because police have been called to three different scenes only to learn no crimes were being committed, and they believe the calls to police were made in “discriminatory” fashions to prevent citizens from enjoying their civil rights.

According to MLive, “The proposed ordinance puts a prohibition on any person denying another individual the enjoyment of civil rights, or for any person to discriminate against an individual in the exercise of civil rights because of actual or perceived color, race, religion or creed, sex, gender, identity or expression, sexual orientation, national origin, genotype, age, marital status, medical condition, disability, height, weight, or source of lawful income.”

Local authorities have not commented on how such an ordinance could be enforced, considering when citizens call 911 they likely believe there is an imminent threat. This could result in concerned citizens being considered criminals for merely misjudging a situation.

Two Americas

Political Saint Louis Prosecutors Won’t Charge BLM Rioters That Trespassed on McCloskey’s Property

But they’re still prosecuting the McCloskeys.

Published

on

Saint Louis prosecutors are declining to pursue criminal charges against Black Lives Matter rioters that trespassed on the property of Mark and Patricia McCloskey in June, setting off an armed confrontation with the couple that became national news.

City counselor Michael Garvin announced that the city had decided “prosecution is not warranted” against the riotous BLM trespassers in the case.

The ‘protestors’ in question had been previously citing for trespassing. At one point, a gate to the private community in which the McCloskeys live was broken open, but it doesn’t appear anyone is being charged for causing property damages to the wall. Some the rioters had threatened and waved pistol magazines at the McCloskeys before they trespassed on their lawn.

Although the BLM rioters are getting off scot-free, George Soros-funded Saint Louis prosecutor Kim Gardner is still pursuing a highly dubious and politically charged criminal case against the McCloskeys for the actions in the standoff. Attorneys working for Garder reassembled the courtroom prop that Patricia McCloskey was holding in the event into a working firearm in order to file charges, and they’re doing so against the wishes of a Saint Louis police captain who declined to sign off on a probable cause statement accusing the McCloskeys of illegally brandishing firearms at the unruly mob that had broken into their gated community.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

This is an example of anarcho-tyranny at its finest. The thugs who trespassed and threatened the couple at their own home are being babied and let off the hook, while the couple that merely stood on their own property holding a gun and urging the rioters to move along are being maliciously prosecuted. Fortunately, Missouri Governor Mike Parsons and President Donald Trump have both identified the prosecution against the couple as the sham charges, indicating a pardon would be provided if the case somehow is adjudicated against them.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending