Friends,
The situation of crime is an issue close to my heart. I lived in Salisbury during my collegiate career. I was able to earn an outstanding education from Salisbury University and represent my Alma Matter as a four year varsity athlete in two sports. Salisbury was a great fit and had some of my most fond memories ever. Unfortunately while living in Salisbury I had my most horrendous experiences ever.
My first three years in Salisbury, 2002 to the beginning of 2005, we had no reservations about walking around Salisbury nor was there a talk of crime. Occasionally someone would get jumped and that was all you hear about. Things drastically changed for the worse spring of 2005. While living in Cedar Crossing, a.k.a. “The New Zoo”, off of Onley I had my house broken into, I was at my house when a man was shot and killed at the Old Zoo which is right next to the development, had numerous female neighbors wake up to strange men in their house, and my neighbors houses were broken into. Needless to say I felt a bit uneasy when school was out because I was one of the few in the development because of work and training.
While at my friends’ apartment on Shiloh Street, spring 2005 I believe, we were watching a movie when we heard 5 quick pops in a row and minutes later SPD rolled up to the scene. A man from another apt. a door down came out and shot up a parked car and the bullets went into a family’s house across the street.
One night leaving my girlfriend’s at the time UP apartment when she got back that Sunday from Thanksgiving and we were mugged at gunpoint during the mugging spree in 2006 while in bright lights and there were people returning to SU. These three were brash. Fortunately they were eventually caught and I thank all the law enforcement agencies who helped apprehend these thugs. What ended up making our stomachs curl even more was that we learned they were responsible for a murder stemming from a robbery across from Bennett. Talk about a close call.
For 21 years I went without a breeze of a crime coming near me and then all of a sudden I was immersed in crime. All of this happened while I was doing my normal routine in normal college areas during times that were not late. These are areas right next to the college except for the Shiloh incident and none are in rough areas or so I thought.
When reading the Daily Times article “Spate of crimes not a big trend Statistics rise and fall, but Salisbury remains a safe place” I was very much disappointed and angered that the Daily Time would print “damage control” to paint Salisbury as “safe”. Yes crime happens, but not normally at this rate or notoriety. It is an insult to all who have been victims of crime, especially violent ones, to say the area is safe because it is not being truthful about our situation. And I know too many who have been victims of crime including armed muggings.
What good end does this article accomplish? Nothing. What does this article bring to the table to solve the problem? Nothing. Does this article identify the problems? No. All it adds is an attempt to smoke screen the amount of crime. The crimes this year alone is not the reason for the cry that crime is up. The last few years have all added to the reoccurring theme of increased crime. We all know the long list of crimes.
A problem exists when people are doing their normal routine, at regular places, during normal times and are victims of crimes. How much more reasonable can you be than doing your daily routine responsibly? My friends who graduated before me cannot believe what has happened in Salisbury since they have left. I have friends who swore off Salisbury because of crime and that is unfortunate because there is still a lot of good in the area.
I do not feel as safe in Salisbury as I once did and will not regain that sense of security until the amount of crime is quelled. I do appreciate, as I saw first hand Saturday night, the amount of law enforcement presence out being proactive. That is what it is going to take to combat crime.
I ask the Daily Times to be more truthful in their commentaries on crime and paint an accurate picture of the status of Salisbury whether it is good or bad. That is the responsibility of the media especially on a topic that should never be political or partisan. We are talking not only about the safety of each individual but also the quality and health of our community as a whole. Only truthful discourse and dissemination of information and fact will lead to our ability to effectively respond to our situation.
To our law enforcement officers I hope that you are able to come home safe every night and I wish the best for everyone such that they never experience what I have gone through.
Nicholas Loffer
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
Excellent article. Many agree. We need real solutions.
ReplyDeleteWith Obama as President, expect the crime rate to skyrocket. Democrats hate law enforcement personnel and love to find excuses for criminals. Also, black males will be emboldened to commit more crime since a "brother" is in the White House. They figure it's payback time for the white oppressors.
ReplyDeleteA good post, well put. Having lived in Salisbury for 13 years, we now live about 8 miles out of Salisbury. I do not want my wife to go into town after dark anymore. We try to shop in daylight hours. Using old statistics and telling everyone that Salisbury is a safe place is wrong. The SPD have had their hands tied since Chief Dykes left. Salisbury needs a real Police Chief, willing to implement innovative and effective law enforcement practices to keep crime in check. It will take a Police Chief that works for the community, not a lackey for the mayor. We never appreciated what we had until it was gone. Salisbury can, and will be a safe place to live again, but not under the present Police Chief or the present mayor. It will take more than lip service and lies to make the community safe again.
ReplyDeleteExcellent letter. The vast majority of crime in Salisbury, in my opinion, connects back to drugs. If we became known as a one-strike county for drug offenses, it might turn around.
ReplyDeleteI agree Farmboy. Comparing old stats to present stats is only a way to repeat previous mistakes and justify the amount as "normal". Its the apologists at the local level on the shore at their best. People here dont like change and to some this is a great place. Ignorance is bliss.
ReplyDeleteEveryone's answer to the crime is more or better police. No one will talk about the real cause of the crime and gang problem...DRUGS. As a nation our drug policy is an unqualified failure! Interdiction and incarceration only create more black market and violence. Look at the past 40 years of more cops and just say NO. In the words of America's favorite contemporary philosopher, Dr. Phil, "How's that been working for you?"
ReplyDeleteWe need to suck it up and admit we have been commited to a course of failure. Decriminalize, government controlled distribution/clinics, and reduce the vast amounts of tax dollars being wasted each year. Take the black market money out of the equation and you will see crime plummet. The law enforcement community does not want to hear this, the current policy has been job security and the golden goose for too long.
Control the borders if you want to stop the drug trade.
ReplyDeleteJoeFriday, an uniformed comment.
ReplyDeleteWhile Clinton (Democrat) was president, the COPS program was created as part of the 1994 Crime Bill. It provided funding, using a competitive grant process, to local communities. More than 118,000 law enforcement officers in local police agencies throughout the nation have been hired, helping to reduce the high rates of crime in the 1990s. More recently, the Bush (Republican) Administration has worked to reduce or eliminate the COPS program; earlier this year, the President Bush’s budget recommended providing just $32 million nationwide for the entire COPS program.
In the fall of 2007, Senator Joe Biden (Democrat) offered an amendment to the appropriations bill that funds the Department of Justice to increase the COPS program by an extra $110 million, bringing the total to $660 million.
That hardly suggests that Democrats "hate law enforcement."
Close all the doctors offices if you want to control drug abuse.
ReplyDeleteBack in the "old days" SPD used to have a "jump out" squad, which did nothing but harass the dope dealers. They also used to "jump out" on persons walking around in areas they obviously had no lawful business being at. This kept all the scum looking over their shoulders, fearful of getting caught. Not anymore. The current police chief and mayor are more concerned about "public image", not protection of the public. One of my old sergeants told me, if you're not pissing someone off, and they're not complaining, then you're not doing your job. Aaah, how times have changed.
ReplyDelete10:44 Great idea. Maybe we could put those government sponsored and run dope clinics right next to a slots parlor? That way, when the ever increasing number of dope zombies, increasing because now there's no stigma to being a dope freak, or fear of being arrested, get their daily fix, they can wonder over to the slots parlor and blow the rest of the government welfare check money.
ReplyDeleteLegalization of drugs means higher levels of addiction throughout society. More people addicted means a shrinking pool of reliable workers. A junkie can't find a job, he/she goes on welfare. Now, instead of the government spending money to enforce drug laws, it instead redirects that money, and much more, to giving free money to the unemployable. And the addiction snowball gets larger and larger because we all know how intelligent preteens and teens are, and how unaddictive drugs are. How exactly does that save tax money, and how is it good for America?
12:41 As someone that started his law enforcement career in 1972, I have to say things "we" could do in the "old days" aren't indicative of bad police chiefs, mayors or county executives, but the end result of the efforts of the ACLU and organizations of their ilk. The reality is, things we could do then would end up getting the officer, the chief, the mayor, and the entire town/city sued.
ReplyDeleteOne is example is profiling. On a national level, airport law enforcement personnel can't profile for terrorists. As a result, time is wasted searching babies and grandmothers who are confined to wheelchairs, and seizing bottles of breast milk. The reality is, while every Muslim certainly isn't a terrorist, the likelihood that a terrorist is probably a Muslim is pretty darn high. Political correctness suggests that point be ignored.
I remember a good friend of mine worked in the auto theft unit. His jurisdiction had a serious auto theft problem; increasing annually 125% or more. All of the vehicles stolen from the county were stolen from the same town, driven to Baltimore City on the same road, and later found abandoned in Baltimore City. The same brand vehicles were always targeted: Hondas and Toyotas. Historically, the arrests made were of young, black males that lived in Baltimore City. They would get a ride out to the county to party, then steal a car to get back into the city. The cars were most always stolen after 2:00 am. Well, it didn't take long to figure out where to be at 2:00 am in the morning. That's right, you sat on that roadway just prior to it entering another county and watched for a group of young black males driving in a Toyota or Honda. It was like fishing for carp in a barrel. Auto thefts went down because of the arrests and the Baltimore Sun interviewed my friend about the role of the auto theft unit and the reduction in auto thefts. During the article, he explained the historic nature of auto thefts, and the elementary deduction of who was perpetrating these crimes. Oh man, did he get his a$$ handed to him by the chief. Right out of the auto theft unit he went.
Political correctness in law enforcement is like running in wet cement. Everyone now plays the game, but it's the law abiding citizen that's losing in the end. Heck, there are even minority police officer groups that hand out pamphlets to members of the black community telling them how to file an official complaint against an officer. It's a whole new ballgame.
Oh you must be talking about the "Black Trooper's Coalition" causing pamphlets to be handed out. Hmmm If they start a White Trooper's Coalition I want to join. I guess just to say I am a part of something.
ReplyDeleteWell to the point at hand. The daily Times has be whored out so much by the local politicals "The Old lady just aint what she used to be" It is a dried rag that has become a laughing stock. I can assure you i will not ever purchase that biased rag again,
I do not recall one piece of investigative journalism from that paper in twenty years of reading the rag. It is sad that as a community we have gone to blogging. No offense Joe but each media source has its place. Congrats to you because you have have obtained a large demographic that the daily times counted on for revenue.
I think it speaks volumes that one can come on the Salisbury News and give their account. The Daily Times kicked back numerous editorials I submitted. They were clean, but they did not follw the party line of the Daily Slime. So I know my little purchase will not effect them, but I do see a trend of people tired of the slated bull crap they have put out.
Anyone that does not believe crime in this area has not gotten worse is full of crap. As an insider the numbers for overall calls for service can be adulterated in many ways. Like open a seperate card for each offense found on a call. They claim it is for UCR reporting. If you want the numbers up there are many things they can do, If you want numbers down for the year you dont cant property checks, business checks.
The the editor od the Slime feels so safe i want him or her to go out tonight and get twenty dollars from each ATM in the City. Or walk home near the college after 10 on a warm night. Thugs hate the cold. There may be something scientific there I am not sure.
Anon917 - Com'on! You fuel the fire with that garbage.
ReplyDelete12:45
ReplyDeleteI don't agree that we would create more addicts. Getting the stuff is not the problem, but they have to pay for it, and to do that they become criminals. If you couple the delivery with counseling and education programs I think we can reduce the number of users, but the big win would be putting the cartels and dealers out of business. That would be a tremendous benefit to our society.
Anon 10:44
I think a big part of the problem lies with the Parole and Probation Board. Maybe they have too many cases to track, maybe they have a few favorites. I don't know. But I DO know that some have tested positive for drugs and are still not sent back to jail.
ReplyDeleteI agree many of these crimes are repeat offenders. What ever happened to 3 strikes and you're out?
ReplyDeleteThey just gain more criminal skills in jail a few years.
5:47 Again, the masses that get on drugs are suddenly masses of useless flesh without functioning minds, except wondering when they can get high again. What gainful employment will they be able to obtain to earn money to pay for these legal drugs? And the counseling part, I don't understand. Legalize the stuff, basically saying there's nothing wrong with it, and then offer them counseling to tell them it's bad stuff? If it's bad stuff, why legalize it in the first place? Alcohol and alcoholics, like tobacco, have been a scourge in and on our society. The only reason they're both legal is because the government would take such an incredible hit in taxes if they outlawed the stuff. Once the government started taxing dope, the same thing will occur. The revenue stream will become so lucrative, the government will never be able to put that genie back in the bottle. Do you remember that movie Escape From New York? Legalize drugs and we'll be there a lot sooner than at the speed we're already moving in that direction.
ReplyDeleteThe word is out on Salisbury and crime. My sister-in-law's niece was considering coming to SU in the fall. But all they heard about was how dangerous it is in Salisbury. This is coming from college students who have been robbed and assaulted. Needless to say they decided not to send her to SU. It isn't just us crazy bloggers who think Salisbury has become dangerous.
ReplyDelete8:13
ReplyDeleteI never said legalize, I said decriminalize. You can still arrest the thugs for selling (but who will they sell to if you can get it for free at a clinic). No tax, just treat the addicts, guide them toward soberity, and eventually even become a taxpayer down the road. Hey, I am not saying the plan will work for everyone, but what we are doing now has no chance of working, and we have already lose a generation to the plague. We must make hard choices for our own protection, and that starts with eliminating the black market. Thanks for the civil exchange of opinions.
MSNBC reported that California made 7 million bucks last year in tax revenue from "medical marijuana",which makes for a good argument for decriminalization but decriminalization of drugs alone will not completely stop crime.The really violent criminals would still find some motive to go out and shoot people.
ReplyDeleteNick, Its funny how It took moving from NYC to the bury for school to see how really F uped that place ( Salisbury) really is..honestly i have been all over this country and I have not witnessed such a place as unfriendly as that place..keep up the good work you crooked politician assholes, im glad to be outta that town.
ReplyDeleteshame..it has potential
Nicholas,
ReplyDeleteI've lived a block away from Shiloh street almost my whole life (22 of my 23 years) and don't recall the shooting you are describing (or any shooting on that street for that matter). While I'm not debating that the neighborhood is not as good as it used to be, I think you may be exaggerating your story.