Leftist New Yorkers are learning the hard way that their pro-crime policies reap ruin

Let me just start by saying, Iowa’s Chuck Grassley is an absolute menace, because apparently it is his “bipartisan” effort that one leftist writer for CNN lauds as a great idea to combat the drastic spike in retail theft currently plaguing big cities under Democrat control—more bureaucracy and bigger government.

Keldy Ortiz is a writer based somewhere in New York, “who focuses on issues of race, community affairs and social justice” and in an opinion piece published yesterday by CNN, Ortiz lamented the closure of big box stores (due to shoplifting) in urban centers; as Ortiz noted, minorities suffer the most. Ortiz acknowledges that the spike in retail theft is a serious issue, and writes:

Whatever the cause and whatever the scope of the problem, something has to be done to address retail losses caused by crime.

But there must be a better solution than pulling up stakes and fleeing communities in need.

And… then Ortiz showed me exactly why I’m right to question whether or not leftist voters have much to offer in the way of political solutions (they don’t), and validated my rather biased assumptions of the average modern Democrat:

One thing they could do is focus their efforts on organized crime gangs that fence stolen merchandise online.

Eureka! Why didn’t we conservatives think of that? Instead of restoring the Western sense of law and order and returning to a society where shoplifting and retail theft is criminalized and penalized, the solution to the crime epidemic lies in the hands of the private businesses! But not totally, they don’t really have a right to seriously defend their property and neutralize thieves, they can simply “focus their efforts on organized crime gangs” that resell the stolen goods.

Is he proposing that the little bodegas that closed up shop hire private investigators and forensics analysts? Does he think the corporate executives are willing to invest in a system to track down the criminals who will be immediately released and let off the hook by pro-crime DAs ? I mean seriously, what does his suggestion even mean?

Ortiz’s idea actually reminds me of a conversation I’ve had with my youngest son many times. Around the age of four he started asking if I could “build” him a robot. I would tell him, “Well, robotics is a pretty complicated field, your momma knows nothing about building robots, and I don’t own a factory to machine parts… so probably not.” His answer? The very childish, “It’s easy! You just build it!” He clearly didn’t understand that his idea wasn’t grounded in reality at all, but in his defense, he was four—Ortiz has got to be in his 30s or 40s….

Ortiz then touts a recently passed federal law, the INFORM act, another violation-of-privacy measure, before he voices his support for Grassley’s Combating Organized Retail Crime Act, which according to Ortiz, would “establish a multi-agency bureau to investigate retail crime.” Oh great… a bigger federal government.

“Republicans” in Congress and government, like Grassley, have completely besmirched the word, polluted the principles of a representative republic, and destroyed the notion of a federal government subservient to the States—the very type of government endowed to the American citizenry by the Founding Fathers—all with the help of Democrat accomplices. If Grassley’s initiative for more bureaucracy and more surveillance isn’t the perfect example of “two wings to the same bird,” I don’t know what is.

Image: Free image, Pixabay license, no attribution required.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com