Comment by tedivm
3 years ago
When I was younger our house was robbed and some prescription drugs stolen. Not only did we know who did it, we had text messages where they admitted it and a witness who came forward. The police refused to do anything about it, and told us that if we wanted them to do anything at all we should consider voting for a different mayor.
Because the mayor created policies that tied the police's hands? Or because they just wanted a different mayor ("vote that librul out or we ain't doing shit" type of thing)?
Probably because they just want a different mayor. Mayors and prosecutors don't have the ability to tie cops' hands. Even council and plebiscite acts to direct the police to treat certain crimes as "lowest priority" are routinely ignored. Mix in decades of copaganda and qualified immunity, and you get American cops that aren't accountable to anyone.
I read it as more "we won't do anything unless the mayor forces us and we know this one won't".
They didn't like the mayor because he supported a civilian audit board. This was eventually forced on the city anyways by the DoJ due to the unbelievably rampant corruption and abuse in the department.
Springfield, Massachusetts if you're curious.
Actually I think the police should take direction from a democratically elected mayor. The problem is that they are most often not politically accountable to anyone at all. Not sure about the particulars of your situation, but that is a very odd response.