Seattle Police Chief Tells People To Call 911 If They Hear 'Racist Name-Calling'

Don't the authorities have better things to do with their time right now?


Seattle's top cop may want to get her priorities straightened out. In the midst of the global COVID-19 pandemic, Police Chief Carmen Best used her most recent "chief's brief" update on the coronavirus crisis to urge residents to dial 911 if they are the victims of racist name-calling.

It's a time-wasting imperative—and one that's at odds with the First Amendment.

In her briefing, Best called upon the expertise of a former local news anchor, Lori Matsukawa.

"Hate crimes have no place in our community," said Matsukawa. "We are all trying to deal with the COVID-19 public health crisis together. If you are a victim of a hate crime or hate-based harassment, please call 911."

"We will document and investigate every reported hate crime," Best continued. "Even racist name-calling should be reported to police. If you aren't sure if a hate crime occurred, call 911. We are here to help."

This is unhelpful guidance that conflates two completely different things. A hate crime takes place when a person, motivated by animus, engages in criminal activity against a protected class. Importantly, the underlying action has to be criminal in nature: vandalism, assault, etc. Mere speech is not generally criminal, except in a few special cases (true threats of violence, for instance). Racist speech could be an element of a hate crime conviction, but engaging in racist speech is not itself a criminal action. In fact, hateful speech is clearly protected under the First Amendment, according to Supreme Court precedent.

Telling people to report racist name-calling to the police is thus bad advice. At best, it's wasting police officers' time. But it can actually lead to far worse consequences: Inviting the police to intervene in speech-based disputes between people is a recipe for disaster. Teachers, counselors, and parents, for instance, could reasonably interpret Best's remarks as an obligation for them to call the cops on kids who use derogatory language. Over-criminalization of teenage misbehavior in schools is one result of the mindset that people—even kids—causing each other offense ought to be a matter for the police to handle.

In any case, it does not inspire confidence when Seattle's top law enforcement authority uses her crisis platform to blur the important distinction between hate crimes and hateful speech. (Seattle PD did not respond to request for comment.)

NEXT: U.K. Cops Remind Us Why We Should Resist the Government's Coronavirus Power Grabs

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This is the major problem I have when people talk about the increase in “hate crimes” under Trump”. “Hate Crimes” used to mean assaults and lynchings. A hate crime threat was a burning cross in the middle of town. Now, the label has been watered down to include schoolyard name calling and swastikas drawn in sidewalk chalk (really it’s gotten on the news multiple times over the past several years, and almost all were clearly drawn with small child levels of drawing ability, so again, schoolyard prank).

    1. I think that the only thing that has changed is that certain people are now looking for “hate crimes” everywhere.

      1. It is the duty of tolerant people to report intolerant people to the authorities and have them punished. The more harshly the better.

        1. It’s the only way to demonstrate how tolerant we are.

          1. Do you use a pay~pal account, in case if you have you can add an extra 300 a week to your profit just working on the laptop a few hours per day, check out this site G00gle Consultancy Company

        2. Yes, of course, we must punish them all.

        3. Reporting and/or arresting people just for name-calling is not the way to go. If and when they commit physical assaults against another person or persons, or vandalize their property due to their race, religion, ethnicity and/or color, that’s a different matter entirely. This latter occurrence is ample reason for reporting perpetrators to the authorities.

      2. when someone is LOOKING for hate crimes, everything is a hate crime. I”m waiting for the time someone calls thjis ridiculous excuse of a top cop to report that one black male was pointing his long gnarlu black index finger at another individual of very similar appearance, and referring to the other one with the “n” word.. you know the one I mean.

        1. Maybe call 911 and report the police chief for threatening everyone’s 1A rights? That works.

          I’m sure what keeps her up at night isn’t the prospect of someone calling me “cracker”. Not the kinda “hate speech” she’s referring to. What a niggling society we have become.

        2. nigger? is that the word you don’t want to use correctly in context?

      3. It’s not just looking for hate crimes; leftists are also faking them, to the extent that most hate crimes that make the news turn out to be fake.

    2. Coon. Hows that?

      1. I won three Maine coon cats. Am I a racist?

        1. I own three Maine coon cats. Am I a racist?

          (Damn autocorrect)

    3. This woman is literally an enemy of America. We don’t need people like her serving as police chiefs. She is dangerous, really dangerous. She should resign or be removed. Any person in her job who would insult our Constitution the way she did should be removed immediately by the city council. She is basically a thug in the wrong job.

      1. Thinking censorship can be safely wielded by democracy because the “right people”, or even the right people without quotes, have the power currently is whistling past the graveyard.

        Never grant government the power coveted by tyrants. The power is the problem, not who uses it.

    4. We had a “Major Story” in the local news about a kid who’d written the N word.

      In the ice condensation on a car’s window.

      Not only did they originally make a big deal to report it as if it were a massive hate crime, but they had a follow up on it.

      If this is the worst thing we can find, racism isn’t the problem it’s being made out to be.

  2. In fact, hateful speech is clearly protected under the First Amendment, according to Supreme Court precedent.

    So is peaceable assembly, but states are stomping all over that right now.

    1. The right to peacefully assemble has long been restricted by the courts.That’s why, for example, you have to get a permit for a protest.

    2. can i run a hateful church right now?

      1. In SJW Seattle? Depends who you hate.

    3. But you’re safe.

    4. Robby missed the innovation here. It’s not merely “hateful speech” they want reported. It’s hate.

      “Report hate”

      Report your neighbor for WrongFeelz.
      For a *tolerant* society.

      I guess I should report myself, because I *hate* these totalitarian scumbags.

  3. Would anyone be upset if a responding cop shoots the caller?

    1. Technically speaking they are misusing the 911 system, which I’m pretty sure carries the death penalty in many jurisdictions.

      1. Only for the people you misuse the 911 system to report.

  4. Seattle’s top cop may want to get her priorities straightened out. In the midst of the global COVID-19 pandemic, Police Chief Carmen Best used her most recent “chief’s brief” update on the coronavirus crisis to urge residents to dial 911 if they are the victims of racist name-calling.

    So this pinhead is actually encouraging to misuse the 911 system by reporting people for using mean words. OK… what a fucking moron.

    1. Next up, use 911 if your children won’t do their schoolwork or get sassy. And by all means if Burger King screws up your order.

    2. People should call the police, not using 911 of course, when they see someone misusing 911 to report unsavory speech.

  5. Washington is going the way of Kalifornia and that is not good…

    1. A little bit, but still a long way to go. No state income/capital gains taxes. Easy concealed carry and suppressors. No magazine cap limits. An actual legal cannabis market that has managed to replace the black market.

      Overall, I find the state laws here are as close to libertarian preferences as can be found. Maybe NH or AK is better. Things have been moving slowly leftward in the last decade.

      1. You want to bring up gun control in Washington State and then claim it to be libertarian. How about those assault weapons laws? How about the universal background checks?
        Or how about the massive regulations on just about every industry, especially agriculture (which has destroyed the dairy and beef industries in central and eastern Washington)? If Washington is your idea of a libertarian paradise, it explains a lot about what you consider libertarianism to be. Ask someone from east of the Cascades how libertarian they consider Olympia to be.

        1. Did ya hear? Those are the jobs that Americans just won’t do.

        2. Calm yer tits. I said Washington’s laws are as libertarian “…as can be found.” Which means that it is not libertarian, but more libertarian than most states.

          And yes, gun laws have moved the wrong way since I got here, but they have moved that way in most states in that time frame, and our gun laws are still the best on the west coast, and better than most of the east coast too. When it comes to what I consider essential guns rights (easy ccw, easy suppressors) WA is still good. The new laws regarding weapons storage have yet to be tested in court, and probably won’t survive.

          I don’t know anything about beef or dairy regs, forgive my ignorance there. Hemp laws could be improved, in that we have no laws about it and the feds require them.

          1. Moved that way most states? Bullshit. In a good number of states they have become less restrictive. You no longer even need a concealed carry permit in Idaho. And Washington is far less libertarian in it’s laws then Idaho, Montana or Wyoming. You are focused on drug laws only not the overall legal regime. Washington is moving towards authoritarianism not away from it, but hey marijuana is legal. That is all you’ve got.

          2. Montana, Alaska, Arizona, Wyoming etc all have relaxed their gun laws and don’t even required a concealed carry anymore and allow open carry. Also, why are so many businesses moving to Idaho and the other states I listed if Washington is as libertarian as can be? To you it seems marijuana legalization is the only thing you measure libertarianism by. Because otherwise you couldn’t make your argument with a straight face.

            1. He’s full of shit. WA is getting worse every year. More and more kook shit being pushed in Olympia and more progtard initiatives.

              Since es Chemjeff/Cytotoxic, he’s either never been there or a is a recent transplant. Who is also a booster of child rapist illegal immigrants.

          3. Let’s do an informal poll: how many libertarians here would rather live in Idaho, despite marijuana being illegal or Washington were it is legal? Which state do you think is going to win? I am betting Idaho hands down.

            1. And Idaho is a little to authoritarian for my tastes, Montana and Alaska are even freezer. And all of them are better by leaps and bounds then I-5 corridor dominated Washington.

            2. Idaho.

            3. Idaho lol. Enjoy going to prison for 5 years for hemp,far fewer high paying jobs, a shit hole of a major city, and no coast. Also I like living somewhere where I can see major musicians and comedians, eat from the best chefs in the world, pick between several world class universities, and not have my mixed race family looked down on.

              But go ahead, live somewhere based on only their marginally better gun laws. Priorities!

              1. See it is all about marijuana for you. And if it comes to personal freedom, you have far more of it in Idaho then in Washington. Far less regulations on what you do on your own property, how you run your business and who you have to associate with. But hey, marijuana is illegal and we don’t have a coast, other than two massive fresh water lakes that are nearly the size of small seas, Lake Pend O’Reille (which is home to the navies underwater acoustic testing center and has been a test bed for submarine development since WWII) and Lake Couer d’Alene.
                And the gun laws aren’t marginally better, they are leaps and bounds better. As are the hunting and fishing laws, business regulations, property laws, environmental regulations etc. But it all comes down to marijuana for you doesn’t it?

                1. “But it all comes down to marijuana for you doesn’t it?”

                  Maybe if you don’t read the rest of my comment. Go on, read it again and try to guess which one of my reasons is actually #1. Hint, it’s not marijuana.

                  And marijuana laws in this context aren’t just marijuana laws. They are a good shortcut for figuring out which states are authoritarian right wing hell holes. And guess what? Idaho will throw your ass in prison for HEMP not even weed. No thanks.

                  1. You listed gun control yet I showed you that most states in the west are more libertarian. You didn’t mention anything else libertarian, other than income taxes (well completely missing how high every other tax and regulation is in Washington). Your conclusion is not supported by anything other than marijuana and a questionable interpretation of how free gun control laws are in Washington compared to the rocky mountain west.
                    Montana also doesn’t have income taxes or sales taxes. And our property taxes are fair, though vehicle registrations are high. We have far fewer regulations and a far more permissive business environment. Idaho also has a far more permissive business environment. You can’t even counter any of these points so you just ridicule those states and the people who live in them. Can you deny that Idaho and Montana have better property rights laws, more permissive business regulations, more freedom of association, less government interference, better gun control laws?

                    1. Montana, no thanks. I like places with economic activity. Great to visit, terrible place to move if you are in your earning years.

                      And I said gun laws on the west coast. Obviously Montana, Wyoming and others are about the easiest gun laws in the world. Again, let’s keep our comparison to places which actually make some money too.

                      And you can’t just write off legal weed like it’s meaningless. Idaho is a highly authoritarian state based on that alone, and one of the few states that will still put you in prison for mere possession. Also one of the few states to have actually put people in prison for non intoxicating HEMP.

                      I don’t know Idaho’s business regs, but I have not found Washington’s to be onerous, especially compared to Colorado and California, in which I have also done business. I established a Wyoming C Corporation last year, so I am familiar with their very business friendly laws. That’s great, but not enough to make me want to move there.

                    2. Thank you for proving my point that you based your hypothesis on Marijuana laws.
                      Your crack about making money is also funny. It is almost like you don’t realize that your urban economy is based upon the raw resources these places create. You also don’t seem to grasp that people actually might enjoy making a living by farming, ranching, logging etc. Or that we don’t néed to make a lot of money in order to live the life we want. Our cost of living is extremely low and thus we can survive on less. We also have less needs. We enjoy our personal freedom, and don’t want close neighbors. You don’t even try to understand. Instead you dismiss us and look down your nose at us. You create a narrative and then finds facts to reinforce your bias.

                    3. Also, you didn’t mention the west coast in your initial posting. You only mentioned it after I pointed out the flaw in your original argument. Then you moved the goalposts to the west coast. And I am pretty sure the people of Wyoming are quite broken up you don’t want to move there. I hear they are going to hold a moment of silence over their losses.

                    4. Yes, west coast dude may well be correct on a few things when comparing to other west coast states. But I mean, shit! If you have to pick California and Oregon to make your case, you don’t have a case. Kinda like saying China isn’t as bad as North Korea. If that’s your argument, you lose before you go one bit farther.

                      De Oppresso Liber okay you like your state and I’m thrilled for you. But if eating your preference of sushi and visiting some rocky beaches is what you call a fine replacement for personal liberty, just don’t call yourself a libertarian. Shit, I have a relative just south of Seattle that got a $5K fine for cutting down a dead tree in their own yard, that was so far off the road that the only way the authorities could tell is through LIDAR mapping and subtraction. But hey, at least they can legally buy some weed if they wanted it.

                      And no, you haven’t eliminated the black market. Reading something besides your normal sources of confirmation bias would inform you of that if you looked.

                2. I love the Idaho Panhandle (especially around Sandpoint). Some of the most beautiful country in the nation. The state run liquor stores have to go though.

                  1. Agreed. Drug and alcohol laws are puritanistic in Idaho. I will agree to that point.

              2. Enjoy going to prison for 5 years for hemp,far fewer high paying jobs, a shit hole of a major city, and no coast.

                Doesn’t seem to bother the multitude of Californians that have moved there and are contracting out to businesses back home.

                1. Lots of economic losers need a backwater to go to to afford a house. Cheaper does not mean better, usually.

                  1. Not economic losers, different economic drivers.

                  2. Lots of economic losers need a backwater to go to to afford a house

                    Where’s your evidence that these are economic losers?

                    Cheaper does not mean better, usually.

                    Neither does more expensive.

              3. The “shithole of a major city” crack is hilariously ironic considering how Seattle’s filthy cesspool of an urban hellscape led to it being one of the major BatAIDS hotspots.

                1. The outbreak started in a Kirkland nursing home. But that is a nice fantasy.

                  And Seattle is a world class city that attracts international tourism, so yes, we are going to have more exposure to potential pandemics. That’s the price you pay for living somewhere people will actually fly to.

                  1. The outbreak started in a Kirkland nursing home. But that is a nice fantasy.

                    And quickly spread through the rest of the city.

                    And Seattle is a world class city that attracts international tourism, so yes, we are going to have more exposure to potential pandemics. That’s the price you pay for living somewhere people will actually fly to.

                    Lots of cities attract “international tourism.” Doesn’t change the fact that Seattle’s shithole environment made for an easy disease-distributing vector.

                    1. Enjoy all the culture you get outside of cities, then. Hope you like Toby Keith and giant servings of crap food.

                      There is no tie between the homeless population and the covid outbreak in Seattle, moron. If you have such a source then post it. What we do have is a major tourist destination and major industrial destination and lots of trade in services and goods with Asia.

                      And for the record I live in a city nearby Seattle which has all but eradicated homelessness. Made tents illegal and enforced it. Practically overnight, all the homeless were gone or out of sight.

                    2. You are typical of the urbanites who don’t understand rural America therefore you sneer at them. You can’t accept they have different needs and different values. You are barely better than TheRev in this regards. So someone likes Toby Keith and Americana food? And this is a bad thing?

                    3. Just a question, where do those goods being traded to Asia from Seattle come from? Who logs, grows, mines them?

                    4. Enjoy all the culture you get outside of cities, then. Hope you like Toby Keith and giant servings of crap food.

                      The only thing more pathetic and unself-aware than rural provincialism is urbanite provincialism.

                      There is no tie between the homeless population and the covid outbreak in Seattle, moron.

                      I never mentioned the homeless population, moron. YOU brought that up out of nowhere.

                      And for the record I live in a city nearby Seattle which has all but eradicated homelessness

                      Bougies do love their suburban whiteopias.

              4. You poor victim. No wonder you’re “Oppresso”. Haha

              5. Go back to Toronto Pedo Jeffy. If you ever even left.

              6. Idaho lol. Enjoy going to prison for 5 years for hemp,far fewer high paying jobs, a shit hole of a major city, and no coast. Also I like living somewhere where I can see major musicians and comedians, eat from the best chefs in the world, pick between several world class universities, and not have my mixed race family looked down on.

                And can call 911 if you hear someone say “nigger.”

                1. But the city trying to criminalize speech is far more libertarian then outlawing smoking a weed.
                  In all honesty though neither is defensible but I think one is probably more authoritarian then the other. I mean restricting an intoxicant is totally comparable to trying to control people’s thoughts, isn’t it? At least he seems to be at least hinting at the idea that Washington is more libertarian then Idaho because Idaho hasn’t legalized marijuana (yet, though there is a move to get it legalized via referendum).

                  1. If somebody is intoxicated, gets behind the wheel of a car or any other motorized vehicle and gets into a crash that ends up killing or maiming several other people, that is a crime that, in most places, mandates a jail sentence, which it should. A person has absolutely no right to get behind the wheel of a car or any other motor vehicle when s/he has had a few too many alcoholic drinks and endanger other people, drivers, riders and pedestrians alike. They should be busted.

            4. Freer, albeit freezer works as well.

            5. Oh, give him a break. All he’s saying is that WA’s gun laws aren’t too bad. And relative to, say, California or NY, they are great.
              I’m not sure about “most states”, but he did seem to miss that a lot of states have in fact loosened regulations, especially cc, in recent years.

              1. No hey stated that Washington is more libertarian than any state other than possibly Alaska or New Hampshire. When he was pointed out the lack of evidence to support this he then claimed to have meant coastal states, while also insulting anyone who lives in states “that don’t make money”. His conclusions and grasp of the facts were suspect at best.

                1. As is his grasp of the truth.

                2. He also seems like the kind of “I got mine.” progressive who gets more from the cachet given him from the proximity of “world class universities”, “top restaurants” and “world class (popular?) musicians” than from the actual experiential value of those amenities.

                  AND, he forgot to tout the great value of the “smug” he is granted for living in such a great “destination” city.

      2. Explain to me how taxing eastern Washington to build a baseball stadium and football stadium in Seattle is anywhere close to libertarian.
        Or how banning sports fishing during this lockdown is libertarian.

        1. Part of the explanation is that Jay Inslee is a massive idiot.

      3. As for income taxes and sales taxes, the more than make up for it with property taxes, gas taxes, vehicle registrations etc.

        1. I’d rather pay all of those taxes than income tax, any day of the week. No audits, no state IRS demanding forms and threatening prison for incorrect form filling.

          And of course they “make up for it”. States can’t print their own money, so budgets have to be somewhat realistic, including the collections side of the budget equation. There is no magic money printer for the states.

          As for east siders complaining about taxes. Meh. Eastern WA, much like red states, is a net tax beneficiary. Meaning Seattlites are subsidizing you, not the other way around.


          1. I am not a Washington resident but I know how fucked up the stage is from living across the border most of my life and a good portion of my family lives in the Spokane area.
            Olympia keeps increasing how much they spend, they don’t live within their budget and they keep finding new ways to spend money. As for your bullshit about the East Side being net beneficiaries, who do you think creates all those goods and commodities being shipped out of Seattle and Tacoma to Asia?

            1. I was also stationed at Ft. lewis and have several family members in the Puget Sound. Not a single one, not even the diehard progressives, would describe the I-5 corridor as even coming close to being libertarian.

            2. I know, I know. I only have facts and figures on my side, whereas you have …bad feelings. Read the report I cited. There is no argument to be had. Yakima receives twice as much tax $ as they contribute. That’s a whole lotta apples.

              1. Yakima is on a reservation. That isn’t even a fair comparison. You have facts you don’t know how to interpret. Gee, a Reservation received more tax money then a non Reservation. And when did I state I just had feelings, I actually explained why those differences exist and why it isn’t a simple black and white comparison. You just proved my point.

                1. Yakima and Grant counties generate the most agriculture business in the state. Both are net tax consumers, and by quite a margin.

                  Read the fucking report man. I’m done talking about it when the numbers are right on a page for you to look at.

                  1. I did read the fucking report. So Grant county and Yakima county are large agricultural areas. It doesn’t change the fact that commodities always create a smaller corporate tax base then technology. Nor does it change the fact most of the states tax money is spent on programs that Olympia imposes on the whole state. Your constant demands for me to read the report haven’t yet addressed any of the points I have made. Yakima is still mostly Reservation (meaning a large portion doesn’t pay any property taxes). Your report doesn’t address this at all. Your conclusion is not looking at co-variants or confounding variants, and is making an assumption based upon correlation without considering confounding variables. It is a simplistic conclusion that fall apart when you introduce more variables into the equation.

                    1. So provide your report then. Let’s see these co-variants. Gonna have to be a lot of “co-variation” to make up for a 2x level of tax consumption to contribution.

                    2. I listed the co variants. You rely on one single source and then refused to actually address the problems I bring up in your source. I listed the multiple co variants multiple times. You have refused to respond other than to keep appealing to authority through a constant refrain of read the report. It is like you can’t think critically.

                    3. Show me your math. A list of variables is not a report nor a refutation that east washington is a net beneficiary of taxation.

                    4. I am not denying your math just your conclusion as to the causation. And the illogical conclusions you have drawn from a simplistic comparison. Do you not understand statistics or modelling?

                    5. Listing variables you missed is all that is needed to demonstrate why your thesis is flawed. Not that it is wrong overall, but that your thesis is incomplete.

          2. As for your ridiculing of east siders, it’s typical I-5 snobbery. You rather look down on them rather than sit down and actually listen to them. Like most in King County you rather impose your ideals on them. You rather they live the way you decide for them to live. It’s authoritarian. It is the furthest thing from libertarian as can be. This is why your entire thesis is laughable. You rather force everyone to be like King County because everyone else is just red state leeches.

            1. My first business was in Wenatchee. You are making incorrect assumptions. Fact of the matter is that east siders are welfare queens, which is why I roll my eyes whenever they bitch about tax money being spent in Seattle.

              1. They spend money because Western Washington passes programs, most fo which are opposed by the east side, that forces them to spend more than their commodity based economies can support. That isn’t welfare queens that is evidence of the authoritarianism of the west side of the state.

          3. And if Seattle is so wealthy why does Spokane have fewer homeless per capita then Seattle?
            Also, of course technology such as Amazon and Microsoft create a larger wealth then commodity producers such as agriculture and logging. So yes they pay more in corporate taxes. That doesn’t prove shit other than a multinational tech company has more earning potential then a wheat farmer in Whitman county.

            1. Just read the report. There is no argument to be had. East side consumes far more tax money than they contribute. End of story.

              1. Because their industries are commodity based and thus have a lower tax base. Their consumption is based upon what Olympia passes, which is generally geared towards the I-5 corridor. Most of that spending is forced on Eastern Washington, not by their own choice.

                1. It doesn’t matter what the tax base is, it matters how much tax they consume compared to how much they contribute.

                  Provide a citation to back up that they don’t need those tax dollars spent there.

                  1. It is about the spending they are forced to spend. What part of that argument don’t you get. Yes they need the money because Olympia demands that they implement programs they don’t want and can’t afford. They are opposed to most of these programs. Your conclusion is simplistic

                    1. Olympia demands that the I90 be repaired, oh the horror!

                      Get specific or we have nothing tot talk about. Better yet, cite something with some fucking math in it.

                    2. Educational policy, especially of the sjw variety. Minimum wage laws. Environmental regulations, property regulations, permissive welfare, based upon Seattle cost of living not eastern Washington. Civil rights laws. Pro-union laws (especially in education). Worker rights laws that dramatically increase operating costs. Regulations that have all but destroyed the timber industry and ranching industry, thus destroying local economies and forcing more people to turn to the government for support. Gee, destroy the timber industry and then complain when everyone in a town who were employed by the timber industry end up on welfare and unemployment. Destroy the ranch and dairy industry and then point to those employed by those industries struggling.
                      As for basic math, I don’t have to show something as simple as a low tax base because of a commodity based economy that is still required to support programs that aren’t critical to the area (especially if the government got out of the way) and aren’t wanted is going to mean they take in more then they put out. That is pretty intuitive. You think that you are making a point but you really aren’t.
                      Also, considering Seattle depends on goods shipped from Eastern Washington (and Idaho and Montana) for basic survival and for trade, fixing I-90, the only major east west route and a federal highway at that, benefits Seattle as much, if not more than Eastern Washington.

                  2. You are simply looking at money in vs money out and not the reason for why this disparity exists. You think Eastern Washingtonians really want all these programs Western Washington demands they spend money on?
                    As for tax base not mattering, of course it matters. Even if the tax rate is even, a place with a higher tax base is going to put into the pot more money than a place with a lower tax base. Then if you force both places to provide the same service programs, the place that has the lower tax base is going to end up needing more money then the place with the higher tax base. This doesn’t mean that they are welfare queens, but that they are being forced to support programs they don’t want and can’t afford.

                    1. You nailed it. And Seattle orogtards are the worst. They’re fleeing Seattle now to fuck things up in Spokane.

          4. My god, you’re so selfless. Give yourself a pat on back, Oppresso!

          5. Fuck off Pedo Jeffy. I doubt you ever moved to Seattle. I also doubt you have a real job.

            You should pick a different fake back story.

  6. “In fact, hateful speech is clearly protected under the First Amendment, according to Supreme Court precedent.”

    There is, however, a compelling left-libertarian argument that it shouldn’t be. I recommend Reason contributor Noah Berlatsky’s excellent piece Is the First Amendment too broad? The case for regulating hate speech in America.


    1. “Hate speech” laws are the modern-day equivalent of blasphemy.
      Any speech or idea that brings into question the narrative, must be stopped, lest people start realizing that the narrative is false.

  7. So every time a person of color uses the B word, can I have them arrested ?

    How about if we hear the N word used as slang ? Hate crime, right ? It shouldn’t matter who said it.

    I hope the police get bombarded with calls.

    1. No, but you can call 911 and waste a lot of the police’s time and possibly someone will get shot.
      That’s the real insanity here. She is telling people to call emergency services for something that is not dangerous and unambiguously not a crime. She is telling people to use 911 for completely the wrong purpose.

    2. The B word? Bigot? Bitch? Bingo? Boogaloo?

      1. Bootsy.

    3. Es, ‘nigger’ can be a confusing word. It’s all about context.

      1. All words are about context. Which puts it solidly in the subjective category with no crossover to objective. Similarly, context requires deciding the intent and thought process of another person without their input, which is a solid crossover into thought control, and will almost always include thought process and objectives of the accuser, which are far less determinant in the context of the immediate situation. As such, my accusation and assumptions about what you think carry far more weight than what you say about your own thoughts and intent.

        1. Ah, but there are certain people, people groups, political parties, etc, who WANT a little (or a lot) of subjectivity in the law. Allows for selective enforcement. And “selective enforcement” is the name of the game for people who want to increase political power.

          If you look at any of the most horrific tyrannies of the 20th century, you’ll see that a complete freedom from any constraint on selective enforcement is a key component of tyrannical power.

          Gulags, re-education centers; they’re just end-case development of thought crimes and speech crimes.

  8. Now is the time for all good SWATters to come to the aid of their country by swamping Seattle’s 9-1-1 system to report the hatefulness of her speech.

    1. Call of Duty noobs are the real heroes.

  9. 8 police cars just went by my house at high speed, lights and sirens a’blazing. I guess someone thought they heard the c-word.

    1. “Canuck”?

    2. Communist?

    3. Commentariat!

    4. Cruller!

  10. “Hate crimes have no place in our community,” said Matsukawa. “We are all trying to deal with the COVID-19 public health crisis together.

    It’s not clear from the report but I wonder if this includes referring to the “China virus”. But we should understand if hate crime laws stick it’s only a question of when.

    1. Hate crime laws have stuck. Hate speech laws, thankfully, are still quite clearly violations of the 1st amendment. So far. This person is telling people to report things that are not crimes to the emergency line. She should be fired.

  11. What if someone calls me “transphobic”?

    1. Yeah, most people calling people “transphobes” don’t seem to be doing it with a lot of love.

    2. What we should do is all get the number for Seattle PD and call them any time anyone says something that offends us.

      1. I hate your idea.

      2. Reason Commentators hardest hit… J/K

      3. She specifically said call 911. Is there an app that will make your phone call 911 in a different city?

        1. If there is, do that. I figured 911 wouldn’t connect to the right place if you are not in Seattle.

    3. In Seattle? You risk getting arrested for hate crimes.

    4. That always sounds like Star Trek’ technobabble to me.

  12. somebody doesn’t watch “Outrageous 9-1-1”

    1. But now, she might be ON the show.

  13. Someone obviously though 1984 was a how to guide rather than a cautionary tale.

    1. Seems to be a common problem these days.

      1. Unfortunately, you are right.

    2. I think she was taught in the British school of policing. Harass civilians for thought crimes and ignore the actual criminals as they assault people.

  14. This is silly.

    Racist Republicans, gay-bashing conservatives, Muslim-hating clingers, Asian-scapegoating right-wingers, misogynistic faux libertarians, Jew-hating slack-jaws, and white supremacist Tea Partiers have rights, too. Those rights emphatically include the right to exhibit bigotry when addressing or describing others.

    1. You are exhibit A for how bigotry is a right. Why do you even bother? It isn’t like you have shown any sign of intelligence, because you show no signs of self reflection or awareness. You are as hateful, if not more, than those you ridicule and generalize about. You are binary in your thinking and uncreative in your responses. You are simplistic and puerile. You also seem to have no original thoughts, but blindly repeat trope and consider yourself (mistakingly) clever. I would not be surprised if you are not even a real person but a computer program with a rather mundane and inflexible algorithm. If you ever posted something thought provoking, most of us would be rendered speechless by the pure novelty of it.

      1. A decade ago Artie used to be mildly amusing, in a train-wreckish sort of way. Since he discovered copy and paste on his computer, though, he has become a little lower than a run-of-the-mill-troll.

        He has become predictable. And lazy. And trivial. All deadly sins in any effort to be considered worthy reading.

        1. He is quite stupid. What are it’s origins?

      2. But even a blind pig finds an acorn once in awhile. He’s making fun of a principle, but the principle is true. There are no race/sex/etc. exceptions to freedom of speech and freedom of association, no matter how many courts have unconstitutionally manufactured them. The Constitution is not meant to limit citizens, but to limit government. The government is not allowed to treat citizens as anything but equal under the law. The citizens are in no way so constricted. Whether such behavior is or is not immoral or antisocial, it was never meant to be made illegal.

    2. How about Jim Crow/eugenics-supporting, welfare state bennies to keep the darkies in their place-loving, Gulag-denying, censorship-boosting, re-education camp longing, frail/pale white liberals? Do they get rights too?

    3. Yeah. White people are terrible.

      1. SOME white people are terrible. Mostly the ones who are, in their own minds, so very much better than other white people. Who think they are the very BEST white people. Who must, it appears, think they are the supreme white people.

        I call them White Supremacists, but somehow that confuses people. I don’t get it.

  15. “If you aren’t sure if a hate crime occurred, call 911. We are here to help.”

    “Hello, may I please speak with Chief Best? … Oh, okay, I’ll speak with you instead. I’m not sure if a hate crime occurred, and I’m hoping you, as the Chief indicated, can help me decide.”

    1. “My friend called you an evil, petty, homely, power-hungry, stupid, smelly pig. Would that be a hate crime? Btw, they live in Canada”

    2. If not for the damage to emergency services and those who require them [which she is already contributing greatly], the ideal solution would be to bury 911 in “I’m not sure if this is hate, but I’m gonna report them all anyway cuz I’m annoyed and not intelligent enough to handle this myself” calls until she backs the hell off and apologizes for her stupidity.

    3. “911? Hate crime! Hate crime! Oh, I don’t know, I don’t know…he might have said “bigger”, but I just don’t know! Send a squad car, quick!”

      1. “Because of these harsh times of papers, please firming up, please report your neighbors to police if they say something government doesn’t like.”

  16. Seattle

  17. It’s true. I was watching “Jackie Brown” on tv the other day with the windows open. Sam L. Jackson and Pam Grier got the police called on me.

    They let my tv off with a warning………. this time.

    1. Back when America was great in the 1950s, swearing got the police involved because you offended the sensibilities of the ladies.

      Now in our modern, socially and ethically improved era, swearing gets the police involved because you offended the sensibilities of the lads and ladies.

      Wait, what?

  18. It’s a pretty fucked up society that imbues untrue words with so much power.

    Lying should be criminalized, but using 911 emergency services, really?

    1. “…Lying should be criminalized,..”

      You’d be in jail in an instant, scumbag bigot.

      1. I welcome reviewing the evidence.

        You don’t, bigot.

        1. “I welcome reviewing the evidence.”

          Bullshit. You welcome lying, scumbag bigot.
          Tell us show the Nazi were really just trying to delouse people and just could get dosage set, right, you lying pile of shit.

    2. Along with the Joooooooossss right?

  19. you know if your going to crack down on freedom of movement you may as well go all the way and crack down on everything even name calling and soon we will be canning people for chewing gum but you can still shit on the sidewalks

    1. Well, it’s gonna depend on who you are, innit?
      And that’s the desired end game for this shit.

  20. Breathtaking idiocy.

  21. Forget it Soave, its Seattle-town.

  22. Fucking Robots! Am I right?

  23. She is calling for people to waste the emergency response system’s resources on name calling. I fail to see how someone being called a rude name, in itself, constitutes an emergency for law enforcement.

    1. It’s not an emergency so much as it’s an income opportunity. If you have a choice of going out on calls to confront home invaders, convenience store robbers, or name-callers, the name callers are statistically less likely to shoot back at the cops.

      1. This also explains why marijuana offenders were such desirable clients for Big Prison.

  24. Seattle PD gonna give some racist a ticket for bad-speak?

  25. I live in Seattle. The police took over 3 hours to respond to my recent home robbery.

    1. Shoulda said they called you a [redacted].

  26. Seattle’s patron deity, Vladimir Lenin, is prowd of his people

  27. da CHEEF needs a new pair of briefs……. the ones she wears now are too tight, putting too much pressure on her brain, thus reducing her ability to think clearly.

    Nannies gotta nannie, and that is something that is no respecter of persons on account of melanin content of one’s epidermis.

  28. And this is part of the reason many of the police and sheriff’s departments around the Seattle city limits no longer have a cooperation/support agreement with Seattle PD. Because they were tired of having their time wasted on petty bullshit that weren’t actual crimes, while also being told to ignore Antifa whenever they attacked someone, but also to harass anyone who wanted to voice publicly an opinion right of the left. Seattle PD also saw a lot of their officers leave over this. It’s funny cause last I heard (granted it was last year), they were understaffed and trying to blame Antifa’s activities on the other departments no longer wanting to work with them.

    It is interesting to note that their website back in 2016 was different then today, it was a lot more… aggressive with letting applicants know that only the “right” people were Seattle PD. And by right I mean left. (I got my degree in CRMJ and was considering police work at the time)

  29. She does realize the bill of rights protects free speech right? What a complete moron..should be fired immediately.

  30. “Mere speech is not generally criminal, except in a few special cases (true threats of violence, for instance).”

    That may be the case at the Supreme Court level, but within King County/Seattle area DA Dan Satterberg routinely treats free speech and the freedom of assembly as criminal.

    Since few cases ever make it past the plea bargain settlement phase and first amendment protections are regularly undermined by the Washington Supreme Court, there’s de-facto criminalization of the first amendment in King County and there has been for a few years now. As you would expect, the ACLU could care less.

    Elizabeth Nolan Brown wrote an excellent story about just this a few years ago.


    1. Here is the specific part of the story:

      1. “PART TWO: How Washington Police Turned Talking About Prostitution into a Felony Offense”


  31. Make $6,000-$8,000 A Month Online With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. Be Your Own Boss And for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot just open this link… Details Here

  32. Why did the Seattle native call 911 on the blacksmith?

    They found a chink in his armour.

    1. Why did the Seattle native call 911 on a drunken braggart?

      He said his was bigger.

  33. My last month’s online earnings was $16953 just by doing very easy and simple job online from home. I am a full time student and doing this online work for 2 to 3 hrs daily online. Awesome job and earning from this are just amazing. Get this today and start making money by follow details…. Read More

  34. Token hire, token ideas.

  35. Ah yes, in a city loaded with coexist bumperstickers and antifa protesters, we find good, old fashioned, authoritarianism.

    I’m nowhere near right, but the left is truly evil.

    1. You don’t actually know what authoritarian means though. It doesn’t mean any restriction on personal freedom. It means strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom. One restriction on freedom (whether justified or not) does not amount to this.

      1. In an era firming up of “papers, please”?

  36. If not for the damage to emergency services and those who require them [which she is already contributing greatly], the ideal solution would be to bury 911 in “I’m not sure if this is hate, but I’m gonna report them all anyway cuz I’m annoyed and not intelligent enough to handle this myself” calls until she backs the hell off and apologizes for her stupidity.

  37. And exactly what are the police going to do? Arrest you for exercising your First Amendment? Good luck on that. But this is what you get when you hire your police chief per Affirmative Action guidelines versus someone actually qualified who has a clue. No shock she’s on the Left Coast.

  38. Racist name-calling is one of those things that is “speech” in some theoretical setting while in practice generally takes an abusive and harassing form and amounts to an interference in the peaceful activity of another person. It’s like having a discussion about bombs on a plane while on-board the plane. Or a theoretical discussion about assassinating the President of the United States. Or walking through a children’s playground wondering aloud about the pros and cons of legalizing sex with children. You can talk about how these things COULD be discussed in a debate like setting where no actual threats are made (as I am doing here), but in practice the people who say these sorts of things are exactly the type of people to blur the line between “speech” and “threat”. The American tradition of defending “free speech” is commendable but it quickly descends into absurdity as Americans try to define it scientifically or objectively when the concept itself resists being defined. It is constantly under assault from those who seek to exploit its freedom in order to cause harm to others and those who seek to curtail the freedom so that they may control (and harm) others.

    1. The Supreme Court doesn’t have issues with what you speak of.

      And the purpose of speech is to have an effect on others, so “interference in the peaceful activity of another person” is it working as intended.

  39. Make $7500 every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our Fox80 website and start getting that much needed extra income every month… You’ll get trained by us, no prior experience needed open this link…… Read More

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.