By Steve Pomper

What if you hired a lactose intolerant milkman and then he refused to deliver milk? You’d fire him, right? Well, perhaps voters in blue jurisdictions should also fire their public prosecutors. In L.A., they’re trying to do just that by recalling DA George Gascon. Like the milkman who won’t deliver milk, voters are hiring prosecutors who won’t prosecute lawbreakers.

They’re across the nation, many supported by leftist moneybags George Soros. Chesa Boudin in San Francisco, George Gascon in L.A., Kim Foxx in Chicago, Kim Gardner in St. Louis, and Racheal Rollins in Boston, to name a few. All have amassed infamous records for not prosecuting even violent crimes.

They support Second Amendment-infringing gun laws while refusing to prosecute violations of existing gun laws. Though, if the “suspect” is a law-abiding citizen defending his or her home, then they’ll make up a crime to prosecute. Just ask the McCloskey’s, right, Ms. Gardner?

According to Eric Lendrum at American Greatness, after reading his article, “Minnesota Prosecutor to Stop Prosecuting Traffic Stops In Protest of ‘Police Brutality,’” you can add to the non-prosecutor’s list, Ramsey County Attorney John Choi. “In a statement to CNN… Choi claimed, without evidence, that such traffic stops lead to police officers fatally shooting black suspects.”

Attempting to justify his anti-cop views, Choi said “We really need to start thinking about the… negative impact… and the outright racial disparity is telling by looking at the numbers.” Interestingly, “Choi did not cite any actual numbers….” Why? Because all legitimate data points to the opposite being true.  

And the smoke and mirrors leading to fabricating the myth about police use of force against minorities continue. Why should people believe the myth? Because a leftist radical says so, so you better or be ready for some big-league bullying.

It appears Choi is holding his breath and stomping his feet because he tried to prosecute a police officer (cops he’ll prosecute) for shooting and killing a suspect during what began as a traffic stop. But a jury acquitted the officer. How dare they not fall for Choi’s apparent lack of sufficient evidence to convict? So, rather than mounting a better case, he prefers to stop prosecuting “minor” traffic stops—even if they result in felony arrests.

Choi sought help forming his new policy from the far-left Vera Institute of (social) Justice, which is peddling its own “Motion for Justice Initiative.” As noted by American Greatness, “the Vera Institute falsely claimed that ‘these non-public safety stops’… occur when a person is detained for a minor infraction while police seek evidence of a more serious crime,’ and also asserted that ‘research shows that racial and ethnic bias play a role in police decisions to make this type of traffic stop.’”

So, what do these prosecutors consider “non-public safety stops?” Well, my department had a similar non-prosecuting “prosecutor,” Pete Holmes, for the last 12 years of my career. Fortunately, he lost in the most recent primary and will be replaced. He won’t be missed. Imagine being too much of a leftist twit even for Seattle.

Upon entering office, Holmes, who’d never prosecuted a criminal in his life, decided to send laws through a social justice prism before prosecuting (or not prosecuting) defendants. Below is his version of a “non-public safety stop.” I’m thinking Choi’s will be similar.

Holmes chose the traffic crime of “Driving While License Suspended 3rd Degree” (DWLS3) to de facto de-criminalize—well, depending on your social justice status, as he admitted during a videotaped interview. DWLS3 is a Washington state (RCW) traffic crime resulting from a driver’s failure to pay a prior traffic citation.

Cops stop most drivers for moving violations, which are a matter of public safety. Police stop other drivers for faulty equipment like defective brake lights or broken turn signals. Again, public safety violations.

Holmes views DWLS3 as non-public safety-related and would not prosecute these citations dependent on assessing the violator’s race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status (at least, Choi won’t prosecute anyone—I think).

First, police had to stop the driver for a violation, issue a citation (likely for a moving violation), the defendant not pay it, gets stopped again (likely for a moving violation), and discovered to be DWLS3. A public safety risk? I’d bet, yes.

To get a better idea of what Choi means, specifically, by “non-public safety,” according to Police1.com, via Pioneer Press’s Mara H. Gottfried, “St. Paul’s police chief told officers not to pull people for equipment violations unless there are public safety concerns.” Okay, if it’s not a public safety concern, then why is there a law against it at all?

Choi also said, “He won’t prosecute most felony cases that result from non-public-safety traffic stops.” There was a time when a felony case resulting from a “minor traffic stop,” was called good police work.

This is probably a good time to remind folks, it was an Oklahoma state trooper who arrested Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh. The trooper stopped him for a “non-public safety” (missing front license plate) traffic violation.

In John Choi’s Ramsey County (St. Paul), police officers would not have been allowed to stop McVeigh, the mass murderer who killed 168 men, women, and children and injured another 680. Does this non-prosecutor truly have his constituents’ interests at heart, or is he simply a political milkman who refuses to deliver milk?