Democrat’s CAREN ACT Would Outlaw “Racist” 911 Calls by White People
Written by Luis Miguel
A San Francisco public official introduced an ordinance that would make it illegal for individuals to make groundless “racially biased” 911 calls, a policy that would potentially discourage people from calling the police on nonwhite perpetrators, placing lives in jeopardy.
Supervisor Shamann Walton said he introduced the CAREN Act — or the Caution Against Racially Exploitative Non-Emergencies Act — at the Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday after a number of high-profile 911 calls involving minorities.
Walton wrote on Twitter that “racist 911 calls are unacceptable.”
Racist 911 calls are unacceptable that’s why I’m introducing the CAREN Act at today’s SF Board of Supervisors meeting. This is the CAREN we need. Caution Against Racially Exploitative Non-Emergencies. #CARENact #sanfrancisco
— Shamann Walton (@shamannwalton) July 7, 2020
If passed, the ordinance would amend the San Francisco Police Code, making it unlawful to “fabricate false racially-biased emergency reports.”
In a statement, Walton said the ordinance would “protect the rights of communities of color” who are the victims of “fraudulent emergency calls.”
The ordinance’s name comes from the slang term “Karen,” which Urban Dictionary defines as the “stereotypical name associated with rude, obnoxious and insufferable middle aged white women” — apparently the leftist belief is that this isn’t racist toward whites.
In one case that Walton cites that allegedly proves his point, a white couple called the police on a Filipino man who stenciled “Black Lives Matter” in front of his home in San Francisco.
In another incident, Alameda police appointed an outside investigator after someone called the police on a black man in May who was exercising outside.
Then there’s the recent case of 41-year-old New Yorker Amy Cooper, who called the cops on a black man who was bird-watching in Central Park in May. Cooper was charged on Monday with falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.
Walton’s staff told Forbes that, if passed, the ordinance would allow “victims” of racial bias to seek civil remedy in court.
The move comes after State Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Oakland) proposed legislation in June to end “discriminatory” police calls by classifying them as “hate crimes.”
Bonta said of his proposal:
If you are afraid of a black family barbecuing in the community park, a man dancing and doing his normal exercise routine in the bike lane, or someone who asks you to comply with dog leash laws in a park, and your immediate response is to call the police, the real problem is with your own personal prejudice.
Although making a false police report is already a crime, Bonta’s bill would make it possible for anyone “victimized” by such an incident to sue the caller for up to $10,000.
This follows the common leftist pattern of designating things that are already crimes as “hate crimes” in order to bestow a sense of illegality to some secondary behavior or belief so as to make it a crime in and of itself, independently of the actual crime.
For example, assault is already a crime, one that anyone would recognize as heinous and worthy of being illegal. But by creating a “hate crime” that consists of assaulting nonwhites out of “racist” motivations, the notion of “racism” eventually becomes a crime in and of itself. So now any act of “racism” is a hate crime on par with the actual crime of assault, even if no act of violence or any real crime is committed.
And because the Left can define what is or is not “racist” as they see fit, they now have a legal weapon with which they can throw their opponents in jail by deeming their political speech “racist” and thus a “hate crime.” In this way, they can not only punish those guilty of wrongthink, but preemptively silence their foes by instilling conservatives with fear of legal retribution.
This applies to the proposed legislation as well. It’s already a crime to make a bogus call to police. So what is the point of designating it a hate crime?
The answer is that by doing so, the proponents of these policies hope to create in whites or conservatives a fear of calling the police even when warranted. After all, nobody wants to be a “racist” — much less be taken to court for it.
The Left has already achieved this in many settings. In Minneapolis, for instance, one neighborhood made a collective vow not to call the police, as a way of showing their nonracism after George Floyd’s death. Now the area is overrun by homeless, and locals break down in regret after admitting they called the police after being robbed at gunpoint.
“Been thinking more about it,” one man said. “I regret calling the police. It was my instinct but I wish it hadn’t been. I put those boys in danger of death by calling the cops.”
The CAREN Act is just another case of social programming that constitutionalists would do well to reject.
Luis Miguel is a marketer and writer whose journalistic endeavors shed light on the Deep State, the immigration crisis, and the enemies of freedom. Follow his exploits on Facebook, Twitter, Bitchute, and at luisantoniomiguel.com.
Courtesy of The New American