If you recall, the Metropolitan Police Department had this inane idea that they would fight local crime by locking down DC's Trinidad neighborhood and placing checkpoints up so that everybody driving into the area had to come armed with a plausible sounding, MPD-approved "good reason" for being in the area. Today, the Washington Post published an intoxicatingly stupid editorial berating critics of these enforcement tactics, asking in their subhed, "Why are there more protests about a police crackdown in Northeast than about the murders that caused it?"
That kind of unfortunate thinking -- that certain neighborhoods must accept violence as a fact of life -- is a reason that there was more of an outcry over police efforts to stop the killings than over the killings themselves. And therein lies the real outrage.YES THE REAL OUTRAGE IS 'THINKING!" Of course!
I can tell I'm going to have to take whatever dumbass who wrote this by their hand and sort of walk them through what an actual thought process feels like. See, dumbass, this "outcry over police efforts" should not be read as being greater than "the killings themselves." Actually, the outcry stems from the fact that DC residents keep asking for effective means of dealing with crime, and this cartoon crap is the best the police seem to be coming up with. Just going out on a limb here! Tell me something, Washington Post, editors...you all are aware that the checkpoints didn't apply to pedestrians entering the neighborhood, right? Well, it is possible for one person to both walk and commit crimes.
Anyway, dipshit editorialist, MPD Chief Cathy Lanier says you're wrong, so maybe you should see about dismounting your high horse:
Chief Lanier announced for the first time that the stated reasons for instituting a blockade of the Trinidad neighborhood were not the true reasons, or at least not the major reason, behind the cordon. There was another, more important, reason, she told the committee, but she could not reveal what that reason was. If the committee members knew what she knew, she was confident that they would agree with her actions, but she couldn’t tell them what she knew.Okay? It was all about some secret crimefighting. Maybe, anyway. Fuck. Who can tell, really. You read the rest of that report, you get the feeling that maybe Lanier doesn't know what the hell she's talking about. Either way, the case for checkpoints falls short, so snack on my balls, and set the city free.