Public Safety Failures in San Antonio

07/26/2024

While San Antonio city leaders claim they are addressing violent crime and making the city safe, there was another shooting death in downtown San Antonio. The city leaders claim the success is due to the Violent Crime Reduction Plan developed by UTSA professors and high-ranking SA police leaders. However, the Plan is little more than “smoke and mirrors.”

The Plan calls for “place-based policing,” which means police patrol cars sit in “targeted hot spots” at apartments experiencing violence. The apartments are selected based on the number of calls about crime reported at the address.

Amazingly (sarcasm), violent crime has dropped at the SAPD-designated “hot spot” apartments. However, the Plan’s “place-based” strategy ignores the fact that crime is fluid and criminals are mobile. It is like people applauding themselves for extinguishing a fire in one room while the rest of the house burns.

On Tuesday, July 23, a 29-year-old female volleyball coach who was visiting from out of town was shot and killed in a random act of violence in downtown SA. This shooting was the second out-of-town visitor killed in downtown SA in a random shooting in 8 weeks.

Furthermore, the carnage across the city has been brutal. Between July 1 and July 21, there were 30 shootings, six stabbings, and 11 deaths that were reported in local news in San Antonio. None were in a “hot spot.”

While liberal city leaders and the police chief applaud the Plan’s success at “hot spots,” murder and mayhem run rampant throughout the city. The idea that police presence is all that is needed to stop crime is short-sighted and typical of liberal/leftist thinking that refuses to hold individuals accountable for their criminal behavior.

San Antonio needs real solutions and actions to prevent and combat crime and violence.

First, the city needs at least 200 more police officers, with more resources and the support of the city and community leaders, to be proactive in their work. If the city’s Anti-Violence Plan proves anything, it is that the presence of police officers deters crime.

While SA Mayor Ron Nirenberg applauded a recent federal grant to hire 50 police, the city should budget its own money for more officers. Taxpayers’ money should be used for programs that benefit everyone, not special interest groups.

Second, the city leaders need to stop hampering the police in their work for fear of bad publicity and liberal/leftist anti-police groups. The SAPD has instituted some policies in the wake of the George Floyd riots that hamper the police, endangering citizens and empowering criminals.

Third, San Antonio and Bexar County need competent District Attorney who is pro-law enforcement and not anti-police. Unfortunately, George Soros-funded Joe Gonzales believes in social justice and is supported by leftist/Marxist groups.

One of the first things Gonzales did after his election was establish a unit to prosecute police officers. He also sought advice and guidance on pursuing cases against police officers from a leftist organization in Austin called The Wren Collective.

Fourth, the city needs to stop fearing and reacting to the liberal/leftist anti-police groups that have surged since the George Floyd riots. By far, these national and local anti-police groups are responsible for pushing liberal/leftist politics that have led to the increase in crime and violence AND police quitting and retiring early.

For example, after the shooting and violence at Hemisfair, the city considered a curfew and increased lighting for safety measures. However, liberal/leftist District 2 Councilman Jalen McKee-Rodriguez said, “It sounds like the actual desire is the increased lighting and police visibility, and the curfew is just an opportunity to cite random people who just so happen to be there. And many of them could be my residents.” He opposes public safety measures and wonders why his community has high crime.

In another example, the downtown San Antonio Public Library asked for an armed police officer to protect the people. However, an activist from the anti-police group ACT4SA demanded the removal of the police because, again, it frightened and intimidated “some people.” If a police officer frightens someone, they are either guilty of a crime or need therapy.

Fifth is the local news media, which is quick to promote liberal ideas but condemns practical solutions. Local reporters have not asked tough questions about the Crime Plan, but they have reported the liberal positions blaming guns and poverty for the violence.

The news media has also been quick to judge and condemn police officers who are accused of wrongdoing by the D.A. and liberal leaders and politicians. Police officers who the D.A. charged were tried in the public court by the local news media and eventually had their cases dismissed…because they were innocent.

Because of these anti-police activists, a D.A. who is ready to prosecute police officers for the slightest reason, city officials who do not support the police, and a news media that is quick to judge and crucify them, police officers have become extremely careful and reactive in their work, which benefits the criminals.

The city leaders and the liberal news media say an expensive anti-violence plan developed by UTSA professors and some police leaders is stopping crime in “hot spots.” The police show their presence and high visibility at “hot spot” apartments, and crime is measured. Not surprisingly, crime has dropped in those hot spots, and the city and the professors say their Plan is successful.

But what about the rest of the city? Crime and violence are not caused or contained at a “spot.” Violence and crime are caused by criminals who must be arrested and prosecuted wherever they might be.

If the Plan proves anything, it is that police should be present throughout the city. However, that means a larger proactive, community-supported police force and a D.A. that prosecutes criminals, not police officers.