So the El Paso Times conveniently forgets that the Chief of Police in El Paso has delivered them a "safest city" award every year since he took the helm. He also doesn't have any problems with cops shooting people they shouldn't shoot. Hell, he doesn't even have a problem with too many people complaining about their treatment by his officers. For Christ's sake he's the damn poster child for doing things right when it comes to policing. But do you think the Shapleigh run newspaper would notice? Hell no.
Read this HERE.
First of all, if you're an elected official and you can't wait to get your face in front of a camera after a tragedy like the murders in Dallas, you're just trying to make the incident about you and build your political stock on the blood of brave cops. Nobody who has worked in politics can deny this. There's always that conversation after a tragedy like this - "Do we make some political hay here, or will it come off as too ego driven?" El Paso's county, state and federal leadership have taken full advantage of recent tragedies across the country to bring attention to themselves - and it's disgusting.
I'll never forget the story told to me not to long ago by a hill staffer who witnessed the chickens coming home to roost. The mother of a victim of a very public tragedy, such as Dallas or Orlando, came into a member of congress' office. The congressperson couldn't wait to meet this mother at the door - had staff photographer ready to go - video and all. The mother walked in and berated the congressperson for raising money on the death of her child. It was apparently quite awful and well deserved. Think about that the next time you see your local politicians mugging for the cameras in reaction to something that happened far away from El Paso.
The reason El Paso's Police Chief did not speak at the conference is because he's not an asshole. Second, he's not an elected official. He gains nothing going up there and giving an ego speech. He was visibly upset at the time and chose not to air his anger, pain and frustration with the tragedy in Dallas - he did the right thing. It wasn't until he was badgered by the press that he uttered a word and just like the press always does, they took it and made it into something it's not.
If you read the editorial it's full of gigantic leaps to a fictional El Paso where the community is divided and needs healing. That isn't true - El Paso has a great relationship with its police - save for the cowardly criminals who have murdered cops in the past few years (and we as a community were universally horrified at what happened to those officers - not a single person made a cross statement. That's a testament to how good people really are in El Paso). El Paso doesn't have a police and community relationship problem. There's no good reason to even suggest that you do, unless you're just trying to sell some newspapers.
The worst part is that the El Paso Times says he slandered El Pasoans when talking about the national BLM movement. And do you know how I know that the Police Chief was not referring to any local entity? Because he suggested that the "leadership of this country" take notice of the group. Don't you think if he meant the locals, he'd suggest he was looking into them? He's obviously talking about the national BLM group.
And here's the kicker - the vigil held (not a protest like Susie Byrd and friends try to sell it as - it was never intended to be a protest and the organizer did an awesome job of getting all the right permissions to have a vigil in the new park - kudos to them for doing it right)... The vigil was put together by "UTEP’s Black Student Union and Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays." Neither of those groups are BLM. It's irresponsible to make the Chief's words about BLM nationally about two local groups who don't call themselves BLM. The paper owes the chief and apology for twisting the meaning of his words to suit their purpose.
Remember - you have local white and Latino politicians calling a black man racist here. And don't forget - the white editor of the newspaper also calling a black man racist. I don't think they get what they are doing here and it's embarrassing for the whole community.
I do commend the mayor and city council for generally staying out of this issue to this point. They weren't trying to boost their public image on the backs of dead cops. I hope they don't do something stupid pertaining to the chief who has done the job any other community would be jealous of - and likely are. The chief is a police officer when it comes down to it. He's not a politician and he's not bureaucrat. He's a guy who gets the job done and needs no "look at me" moments in return. Judging by the number of local cops organizing on Facebook and other media to support him - he's the person they want leading the department. If council does something stupid and gets rid of him the moral in the department dips and that's when you have police and community problems start cropping up.
Some of you may be asking - "well what are they supposed to do in response to a tragedy like this?" That's easy - what did the former President of the United States do? He put out a written statement supporting the right team and kept his face off TV because it would be rude to build his legacy off the corpses of heroes.
In honor of the dead we give them a moment of silence. Your local officials need to give a lot more moments of silence these days.
Don't count on your little friend Tolbert staying out of the issue. He's the Shapleighites representative on Council.
Posted by: abandon hope | July 11, 2016 at 09:04 AM
DK, totally agree and completely support the Chief.
Give the idiots some more rope, they keep going for the gallows.
One point, El Paso was not the Safest City ever. The whole time we were being told that, it was Irving CA that was THE Safest City in the US
Posted by: El Paso officials are self hanging | July 11, 2016 at 08:09 PM
El Paso officials are self hanging, first of all, it is IRVINE, CA. Second, El Paso has been the safest city with populations over 500,000. IRVINE has less than 237,000.
David, I just posted what someone said on Facebook and it is the same as what you are saying. Nothing but attention seeking media whores. Allen was visibly upset and the media pushed him. Too bad the stupid reporter never learned how to do follow up questions like, "Why do you feel this way?"
Posted by: David Sanchez | July 11, 2016 at 09:53 PM
David, don't spin. Irvine had the "Safest City" period, not some number. They had. The official title. ! Do the research.
Posted by: Self Hanging | July 11, 2016 at 10:09 PM
You do the research. SMH at your ignorance. You can't even get the name of the city right, so how much research did you do? You didn't. You pulled it from what someone else was posting because they freaking had the wrong name too! ROFLMAO!
Posted by: David Sanchez | July 12, 2016 at 09:02 AM
No David, I was the one that exposed that lie that had been ongoing for years. You are taking things too personal. I comment about so many issues, yes I misspell and leave words out but the context is more important.
I was also the one that put to rest Lilleys manta of "tear down that wall". Simple questions, had she ever been to Berlin and when the last time someone was shot for sneaking into Mexico.
There are many issues that are not confronted but someone has to do it.
I really don't understand your reaction when it is very simple to look it up and see for yourself that was only ONE city that was designated and it wasn't based on population.
Posted by: Sensitive Nerve ? | July 12, 2016 at 02:53 PM
You cannot write a sensible post, and your "information" is wrong. It was the safest largest city, which means over 500,000 in population. How do you think they can compare small cities to large cities? That is ridiculous and illogical. That is like comparing a high school football team to the NFL. SMH at your ignorance.
Now go back to remedial writing courses and learn the value of punctuation and grammar in writing clear and concise thoughts. :)
Posted by: David Sanchez | July 12, 2016 at 10:39 PM
They didn't go with the population size, that was a El Paso fabrication. There was ONE city only that had the title of being the Safest City. I'm not the one that designed nor supervised the study. They DID NOT do a pop size. They used crime stats period. Obviously you were one of the people that fell for the bs and still want to believe it. Unfortunately for you, can't dispute the FACTS.
You have some serious low self esteem issues and can't deal with being wrong.
The attacks filled with nothing of substance but plenty of insults is very telling.
Posted by: Probecito Menso | July 12, 2016 at 10:49 PM
Since you lack the determination for facts. Read LA Times, dtd 12 July 2016. Irving California was chosen by the. FBI as the Safest Big City in America, 10th year in a row !
Now dispute those FACTS.
Posted by: Probecito Menso | July 12, 2016 at 10:58 PM
There is no such place as IRVING, CA. ROFLMAO! Great FACTS! NOT! And why are you calling yourself names, pendejo?
Bye, Felicia.
Posted by: David Sanchez | July 12, 2016 at 11:26 PM
No hope for some even when presented with facts. Must be a drone voter that does as told and doesn't believe anything else.
Posted by: Probecito Menso | July 13, 2016 at 01:08 AM