As if current worries by many citizens about crime aren’t already high enough, even as overall crime statistics show a reduction in crime since the criminal spikes as a result of the post-George Floyd Defund the Police and No Cash Bail movements, along with the BLM riots, residents in Pittsburgh have more to worry about.
Call 911 and depending on the time of night or how bad your situation actually is, nobody may be coming to the rescue. There’s simply not enough cops.
NRA-ILA reports:
Last month, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Police Chief Larry Scirotto announced major operational changes to police staffing in the city.
Effective February 26, officers would no longer be responding to 911 calls that weren’t “in-progress emergencies.” Calls about crimes like criminal mischief, theft, and harassment would instead be rerouted to the telephone reporting unit or to online reporting. Burglar alarm calls would require a “second authentication factor” (i.e., a video or audio showing interior motion, or broken glass) before an officer would be dispatched, because the majority of such calls tend to be false alarms. In addition, between the hours of 3 a.m. and 7 a.m., desk officers would no longer be on duty at any of the six zone stations. Chief Scirotto explained that, “[t]here is not any data to support us having our zones manned by personnel from 3 a.m. to 7 a.m. For the very one off instance I can’t make an exception.” Those in need of urgent assistance would have to rely on “blue phones” – call boxes with a direct line to 911. Only 22 officers would be covering the entire city during some overnight shifts, due to Chief Scirotto’s conclusion that the data doesn’t support a larger allocation of staff: “it’s enough to cover the entire city at those hours when we have 8 percent of the time people are calling.”
The reason for these changes is a law enforcement staffing crunch. In 2020, during the nationwide frenzy to “defund the police,” the Pittsburgh City Council passed laws that included a police hiring freeze and a diversion of ten per cent of the annual police budget towards “evidence-based violence prevention social service programs.” A local news source reports that in 2020, the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police consisted of approximately 991 officers and that the city “has historically budgeted” for a 900-number force. Since then, though, retirements, resignations and low recruitment have taken a toll, and numbers continue to dip, down to 740 officers as of this month. The bureau “is losing officers far faster than it recruits them,” and “[o]fficials have acknowledged that there is no hope of getting anywhere near 900 in the foreseeable future.”
A “Crime and Safety Impact Report” released in late 2023 by the advocacy group Our America looked specifically at crime spikes in several mid-sized cities, including Pittsburgh. According to that report, from 2021 to 2022 Pittsburgh experienced an increase in rapes and robberies, “a 46% rise in shootings that left people injured,” and the highest homicide rate in a decade.
Perhaps the new reality of reduced police personnel over the foreseeable future will persuade municipal officials to give up on attempts to override the Pennsylvania firearm preemption statute by enacting illegal laws that prevent responsible citizens from defending themselves.
In 2019, for instance, the Pittsburgh City Council adopted gun control ordinances that included a ban on the use of so-called “assault weapons” and “large capacity” magazines in public places. The ordinances were immediately challenged by gun rights advocates, including the NRA.
Court documents filed on behalf of the defendant City and municipal officials indicated that they were “mindful” of the preemption law in enacting the ordinances, and that “[w]ithout state preemption, the City would have gone further and prohibited the purchase and possession of assault weapons and large capacity magazines.” Counsel for the applicants in the NRA suit predicted that “Pennsylvania courts have repeatedly struck down Pittsburgh ordinances that attempted to regulate firearms in defiance of state law, and we are confident that this latest ordinance will meet the same fate.”
That’s exactly what happened. In 2022, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, en banc, in the separate case of Firearm Owners Against Crime (FOAC), et al., v. City of Pittsburgh, et al., affirmed a lower court’s ruling and struck the ordinances as unlawful and preempted. The court specifically pointed out that in passing the ordinances, the respondents ignored state law. The “City was well aware of [the state preemption law] and the abundance of case law from the Courts of this Commonwealth interpreting the expansive preemptive scope of this statutory provision,” and Pittsburgh’s then-mayor, Bill Peduto, had “acknowledged that he and the City Council lacked the authority to enact the Ordinances.”
Pittsburgh’s new mayor reportedly responded to the ruling by indicating that the City was considering appealing “this dangerous decision to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, so that local officials across Pennsylvania can do our jobs and keep our constituents safe.” No such appeal has been launched, thereby preserving thousands of taxpayer dollars from a clear case of throwing more good money after bad.
It does raise the question of what, truly, is a “dangerous decision.” Defunding the police force and imposing a hiring freeze that snowballs into a staffing crisis? Wasting public money to pass and defend local laws in the face of clear advice that the laws are unlawful and beyond the city’s jurisdiction? Is it “protecting” residents from violent crime by enacting illegal gun control measures that burden only the law-abiding? Or is it, to quote the legal counsel for the successful challengers’ to the ordinances, the civic officials’ decision to “circumvent the clear edict of the General Assembly in an attempt to alter the legal landscape to comport with their worldview by whatever means necessary”?
![By Larry Keane President Joe Biden traveled to New York City for a media event to try and show America he’s doing something about rampant crime. Instead, he blamed the Second Amendment and lawful gun owners, said nothing about holding criminals to account and repeated the same tired lies about the firearm industry he keeps at the ready – lies “fact-checked” as being false each time he’s previously recited them. It makes no difference to the president. He’s not even trying anymore. To President Biden and national gun control groups the problem is always the gun and the law-abiding members of the industry. It’s never the criminal. Blaming the ‘Resistance’ President Biden was joined by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Democratic New York City Mayor Eric Adams for a “Gun Violence Strategies Partnership” meeting to talk about how to solve the crime surge, particularly those involving firearms. Instead of real solutions, the focus devolved into blaming law-abiding gun owners and again pushing a gun control agenda. “Enough is enough,” President Biden said. “Because we know we can do things about this, but for the resistance, we’re getting from some sectors of the government and the Congress and the state legislatures, and the organizational structures out there.” That “resistance” the president spoke of is the American people. Over the past two years they’ve become fed up with police defunding policies and soft-on-crime prosecutors, like Manhattan’s Democratic District Attorney Alvin Bragg. They’ve invested in their own safety. The “resistance” is the 21 million lawful gun buyers in 2020, including more than 8.4 million first-time buyers, and the 18.5 million gun buyers in 2021, with more than 5.4 million first-timers. The ”resistance” has backstopped Congress from passing federal gun control that don’t address crime. It also stopped President Biden’s nominations of paid gun control lobbyist David Chipman to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and banking activist Saule Omarova as Comptroller of the Currency because not even all U.S. Senate Democrats could support them. They would have turned those agencies into bludgeons to hammer the firearm industry to achieve a special interest, gun control agenda. Favorite Falsehoods The president turned his aim from lawful gun owners towards the firearm industry and repeated a lie he’s rehearsed several times before. “Imagine had we had a liabil… [sic] they’re the only industry in America that is exempted from being able to be sued by the public. Only one,” the president protested. “Why the gun manufacturers?… It’s got to end. They’ve got to be held responsible for the things they do that are irresponsible.” He repeated the claim for emphasis. “And I find that outrageous.” This is flatly false. The president knows by now, or his speechwriters do and they don’t bother with the facts. CNN, Politicfact and Washington Post have all checked President Biden on his remark, including after he said it in the White House Rose Garden. CNN cleanly rebuked it. “This is false. Gun manufacturers are not entirely exempt from being sued, nor are they only industry with some liability protections.” Politifact rated it “false.” Washington Post wasn’t kinder, saying, “Biden is wrong to claim the gun industry is totally immune.” The firearm industry has liability protections under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), bipartisan legislation enacted under former President George W. Bush. The firearm industry cannot be held liable when unaffiliated third-parties, in this case criminals, misuse a legal, lawfully sold product. It’s fundamental tort law and is similar to an individual attempting to hold Ford and Budweiser responsible for drunk driving deaths. The law was passed in direct response to lawsuits filed against the industry by control groups and municipalities like the city of New York and the state of New York. These type of lawsuit continue to be filed, now even by foreign governments represented by the same gun control group, the Brady Center. Colonial-Era Error President Biden continued to ignore facts on the Second Amendment and its history. He even erred when speaking about the Revolution-era days and why the right to keep and bear arms was so sacrosanct. “When the amendment was passed, it didn’t say anybody could own a gun and any kind of gun and any kind of weapon,” President Biden remarked. “You couldn’t buy a cannon, and when – the – when this, uh, this amendment was passed.” It did, and does, say the right of the People “shall not be infringed.” Even The Washington Post was brutal in their assignment of “Four Pinocchio’s” to this statement. “Biden has already been fact-checked on this claim — and it’s been deemed false. We have no idea where he conjured up this notion about a ban on cannon ownership in the early days of the Republic, but he needs to stop making this claim.” In fact, the Constitution of early America – before the Bill of Rights, and Second Amendment, was even ratified – granted and encouraged “special waivers” to American merchants and sailors, “allowing private individuals to act as pirates on behalf of the United States against countries engaged in war with it.” Americans given waivers and who owned warships obviously also obtained cannons for use in battle. In fact, it is still perfectly legal to buy a cannon today. It is the presidents’ fundamental misunderstanding and blatant lying about the Second Amendment that informs his gun control agenda and misguided approach to solving the crime problem. Millions of law-abiding Americans took ownership of their Second Amendment rights to protect themselves, understanding the president won’t. Instead of mangling the meaning of the right and pushing for more gun control on law-abiding Americans, the president should keep it simple. Take on the criminals and punish them for breaking the law.](https://ttagstaging.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/download-26-218x150.jpeg "Mainstream Media Lies to Cover for Kamala")
> as a result of
None of those things were the cause of spike in crime during the pandemic, but keep pushing that racial division!
I’ll take the bait, but only because I have a cup of grapefruit sections in my desk drawer and I thus know a “discussion” with you won’t be totally fruitless.
So what, pray tell, were the causes of the spike in crime circa 2020?
“…as a result of…along with the blm riots…”
it’s raysis to say that riots caused a spike in violence?
Mostly peaceful protests? Reparations for slavery? Equity? Well shucks😀🙄
*Fiery, but mostly peaceful…
It WAS the spike in violence.
I believe it was the white liberals who run these democrat cities. They ordered the police to stand down.
To appease their constituents whether black or white.
Plenty of these blue cities are run by black folks.
jsled. You have made it crystal clear that you are part of the problem. Not part of the solution.
jsle
You’re just following your hero, Obungholes’ lead of setting us back well over 40 years in terms of race relations.
Got it.
Why does everyone freak out about “defund the police”? Modern policing is barely a 100 years old. WE are responsible for our own safety, WE always have been and WE always will be till 1984 becomes reality. Get real. Support your local Sheriff.
i was thinkin’ ‘cuz violent criminals who are released have to be dealt with again. quaint notion?
I actually fully agree, although the problem is anarcho tyranny and we’re seeing it more and more. The police and courts won’t protect you but they’re sure as hell punish you for defending yourself. Even if they can’t convict you they’ll bankrupt you with lawyer costs and drag your name through the mud.
As the law enforcement recruiting/retention crisis continues, more and more cities will have to make similar decisions to the ones Pittsburgh has, and yet I’m sure they’ll always find the manpower to fully investigate and prosecute *clearly* lawful defensive actions while barely investigating actual murder
Right on Red.👍
That’s fine, they should commit to that and call it going forward, but at the same time support citizens’ right to defend themselves. They’re trying to take away PDs and our rights to take care of it ourselves.
Of course, I live way out in the country and we’ve been taking care of ourselves all along.
Sir Robert Peel, 1822, England. Now over 200 plus years f modern policing. Boston 1836 first publicly funded and organized department in the US.
The democrats ‘climate change’ expert witness was completely witless. ( the ‘im not an expert’ type line sounds like the left wing anti-gun and gender ‘experts’…’I’m not a gun expert’…I’m not a biologists so can’t tell you what a woman is’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nD74Dxzf9Ys
I’ll bet you the overnight highway patrols will stay up. Can’t walk away from that ticket revenue.
in Chicago at least interstates are the stateys not the municipal PD.
Dept of State, ATF, & White House Tied To $10 Billion Mexican Lawsuit Against Gun Manufacturers?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xspcERUcfpU
There’s an article about this over at SNW. I hope these kinds of investigations last long enough to spill over into Trump’s next term, or they’ll all be dead ends.
I’m glad we have total transparency in this police department. Because they are announcing everything. Wonderful.
Man Shot at Anti-Violence Meeting (in program by anti-gun group, for criminals…and paid one month ‘therapy ‘ vacations for criminals paid for by tax payer dollars, group gets 14 mil $$$ annually and asking for another 30 mil $$$ in tax payer dollars from fed.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27OJI3fGsfs
““evidence-based violence prevention social service programs.”” – with what measurable result?
and with what evidence?
Pittsburgh ain’t to bad if you stay away from the jock bars. Joplin is more scary.
Ohhhh, Pittsburgh Pa. Uhh yeah.
Fck Pennzoil.
Scaly ass green shit on the valve covers.
Perhaps the new reality of reduced police personnel over the foreseeable future will persuade municipal officials to give up on attempts to override the Pennsylvania firearm preemption statute by enacting illegal laws that prevent responsible citizens from defending themselves.
Is this part of a standup comedy routine or just historically ignorant?
To believe this you have to kinda be the sort to watch your neighbor construct a building and then come to the conclusion that he’s building an airplane, even though he’s following the instructions for a building to a T.
“Siri, what the the historical steps to building a police state?”.
“Siri, what the the historical steps to building a police state?”.
Besides what’s happening right *now* in this country?
BTW, Dan Z. has moved on from TTAG and has a new start-up at :
shootingnewsweekly.com
…where a bunch of us are also at… 😉
“Calls about crimes like criminal mischief, theft, and harassment would instead be rerouted to the telephone reporting unit or to online reporting.”
Translation: these calls are of no importance.
The reason for these changes is a law enforcement staffing crunch. In 2020, during the nationwide frenzy to “defund the police,” the Pittsburgh City Council passed laws that included a police hiring freeze and a diversion of ten per cent of the annual police budget towards “evidence-based violence prevention social service programs.”
How about evidence based policing and sentencing?
Defund the liberals.
Win elections…
oWNING A FIREARM, is a CHOICE! There are people who should not own a firearm as they are scared stiff of them making them more dangerous than the criminal who might attack them. Firearm safety and proper training with a competent instructor is paramount.
Cause for the spike per Slo Joe via that talented, brilliant ClaraBelle Clown Hair KJP….”Trump’s Fault. It was Trump.”
Again, YOU are your own First Responder. When do we begin receiving First Responder discounts????
Comments are closed.