You punish them for calling the police.
Enter the CAREN Act.
San Francisco supervisor introduces ‘CAREN’ Act to outlaw racially motivated 911 calls
San Francisco Supervisor Shamann Walton on Tuesday introduced an ordinance to outlaw racially motivated 911 calls.
The Caution Against Racially Exploitative Non-Emergencies, or
CAREN, Act could possibly result in people who call law enforcement based on racial bias facing criminal charges.
The ordinance is similar to state Assemblymember Rob Banta’s
(D-Oakland) Assembly Bill 1550, which also calls for consequences for those who call 911 based on biases toward race, class, outward appearance and religion.
During the Board of Supervisors meeting Walton said both measures “are part of a larger nationwide movement to address racial biases and implement consequences for weaponizing emergency resources with racist intentions.”
This is the Tweet in which San Francisco Supervisor Shamann Walton announced his act.
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
This is the associated press release.
Walton cited as examples of why this act was needed:
Recent incidents include a New York woman who called the police on a Black bird-watcher in Central Park; an Alameda, Calif., Black man who was arrested after a woman reported him for dancing in the street; and a San Francisco woman who called the police on a Filipino neighbor for writing “Black Lives Matter” in chalk in front of his house.
Except that in the Central Park case, the black man did arguably threaten her and as someone with a family in small business retail, counterfeiting is a legitimate concern.
The idea that these calls were purely racial prejudice and that there wasn’t an inkling of validity isn’t accurate, it’s narrative.
Do you see something suspicious?
You better not call the cops or it’s your ass that’s in trouble.
That is what the Councilman is going for, to intimidate people who are inclined to call the police into not calling the police on minorities.
The exact opposite of “see something,say something” isnt it great living in these liberal run utopias??? Used to be they was taught any little tiny thing call the po po. Now people will be forced to take care of themselves
CAREN? Really? Like Karen with a “C”? This sounds like a hoax, but then again clown world.
It’s riding that fine line between “too ridiculous to be true” and “so unbelievable it just might be true”.
I often suspect the people who write these laws spend more time thinking up a suitable acronym than on the law itself. (Especially given how many bills we see that are just this year’s re-filing of an identical bill that failed last year, and the year before, and the year before that, and….)
So “swatting” is only allowed if the targets are the correct color?
First, who decides? Who makes the determination whether a call was “racially motivated”?
Second, what’s the default assumption? Is any call made against black suspect assumed to be “racially motivated”, or is it assumed not until proven otherwise? What about calls against white suspects? (And will anyone challenge this based on Equal Protection?)
Third, by what criteria do they decide otherwise?
Regardless of the answers, the uncertainty will reduce the number of 911 calls against black suspects, possibly even from black victims.
Which is only going to make it easier and safer for black men to choose and ply a criminal trade.
What could possibly go wrong?
This all makes perfect sense, given that politicians got away with making up the fake notion of “hate crime”. This is exactly the same thing: make something a crime, or a more serious one, based on an unprovable assertion that the accused was guilty of wrongthink.