'Ferguson Effect' Predicts What Criminals Will Do When Cops Back Down

The world doesn't make sense these days --- left is right, up is down. So, on some level, fearing those charged with protecting us makes sense. But some on the left would have people believe the police target individuals based solely on the color of their skin.

Friday on The Glenn Beck Program, guest host Sheriff David Clarke --- who happens to be both black and a police officer --- talked with author and researcher Heather MacDonald about her new book The War on Cops to investigate these claims.

RELATED: Sheriff Clarke: Taking Shoes Off at Airports Is Stupid and Hypocritical

"Heather, why don't we start by defining this 'Ferguson Effect' and what you found in your research," Clarke asked.

"Well, the 'Ferguson Effect' refers to the combined phenomenon of officers backing off of proactive policing and the resulting emboldening of criminals. Crime is going up," MacDonald said. "The Black Lives Matter movement has held that the police are the biggest threat facing young black men today. That's a complete lie. It ignores the sad reality of black-on-black crime."

Another alarming development, from the president on down, is the message that cracking down on small petty crimes in urban areas is inherently racist. By backing off policing these small crimes, criminals feel emboldened and violent crime has begun to rise as well.

Discounting this evidence is not only stupid - it's dangerous.

"There are some who want to discount this correlation right now, this nexus between this war on cops, what has happened outside of Ferguson, Baltimore and other areas. There's some criminologists that say it's too early. ...What do you say to those people who want to discount this right now?" Clarke asked.

"It's just amazing --- the denial of reality," MacDonald said. "One of the early 'Ferguson Effect' deniers, Richard Rosenfeld, at the University of Missouri, St. Louis, has now changed his mind. I've got to give him credit because he's now going to come under the same sort of attacks I have, I'm sure. But he looked at the 2015 data and said the only explanation that makes sense, that fits the data, is the back off on policing."

With the backing off of policing, Black Lives Matter has been able to grow in power and influence, despite being founded on a myth.

"Black Lives Matter is based on a lie, which is that cops are out there in a racist fashion gunning down blacks," MacDonald said. "The fact is, is that a police officer is over 18 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a cop," MacDonald said. "And now, thanks to the lives of the Black Lives Matter movement, officers are being completely dissuaded from [assertive policing]."

Sheriff Clarke knows firsthand just how hard the job is.

"I'm a 38-year, as you know, 38-year law enforcement veteran, and I'm still out on the street," Clarke said. "But I just want to point out, I'm still out there. I know what these men and women are up against every day of the week. And it is hard."

Listen to this segment at mark 21:22 from The Glenn Beck Program:

Featured Image: Protestors march on Huron Road on December 29, 2015 in Cleveland, Ohio. (Photo by Angelo Merendino/Getty Images).

On the radio program Thursday, Glenn Beck sat down with chief researcher Jason Buttrill to go over two bombshell developments that have recently come to light regarding former Vice President Joe Biden's role in the 2016 dismissal of Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

"Wow! Two huge stories dropped within about 24 hours of each other," Jason began. He went on to explain that a court ruling in Ukraine has just prompted an "actual criminal investigation against Joe Biden in Ukraine."

This stunning development coincided with the release of leaked phone conversations, which took place in late 2015 and early 2016, allegedly among then-Vice President Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Ukraine's former President Petro Poroshenko.

One of the audiotapes seems to confirm allegations of a quid pro quo between Biden and Poroshenko, with the later admitting that he asked Shokin to resign despite having no evidence of him "doing anything wrong" in exchange for a $1 billion loan guarantee.

"Poroshenko said, 'despite the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges on [Shokin], and we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I asked him to resign,'" Jason explained. "But none of the Western media is pointing this out."

Watch the video below for more details:

Listen to the released audiotapes in full here.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

Rice's email details a meeting in the Oval Office on Jan 5, 2017, which included herself, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Vice President Joe Biden, and former President Barack Obama. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, fully declassified the email recently amid President Trump's repeated references to "Obamagate" and claims that Obama "used his last weeks in office to target incoming officials and sabotage the new administration."

On Glenn Beck's Wednesday night special, Glenn broke down the details of Rice's email and discussed what they reveal about the Obama administration officials involved in the Russia investigation's origins.

Watch the video clip below:

Fellow BlazeTV host, Mark Levin, joined Glenn Beck on his exclusive Friday episode of "GlennTV" to discuss why the declassified list of Obama administration officials who were aware of the details of Gen. Michael Flynn's wiretapped phone calls are so significant.

Glenn argued that Obama built a covert bureaucracy to "transform America" for a long time to come, and Gen. Flynn was targeted because he happened to know "where the bodies were buried", making him a threat to Obama's "secret legacy."

Levin agreed, noting the "shocking extent of the police state tactics" by the Obama administration. He recalled several scandalous happenings during Obama's "scandal free presidency," which nobody seems to remember.

Watch the video below for more:

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Colleges and universities should be home to a lively and open debate about questions both current and timeless, independent from a political bias or rules that stifle speech. Unfortunately for students, speaking out about personal beliefs or challenging political dogma can be a dangerous undertaking. I experienced this firsthand as an undergraduate, and I'm fighting that trend now as an adjunct professor.

In 2013, Glenn Beck was one of the most listened to radio personalities in the world. For a college senior with hopes of working on policy and media, a job working for Glenn was a ticket to big things. I needed a foot in the door and hoped to tap into the alumni network at the small liberal arts school where I was an undergrad. When I met with a career services specialist in early March 2013 about possible alumni connections to Glenn Beck, she disdainfully told me: "Why would you want to work for someone like him?" That was the beginning and end of our conversation.

I was floored by her response, and sent an email to the school complaining that her behavior was inappropriate. Her personal opinions, political or otherwise, I argued, shouldn't play a role in the decision to help students.

That isn't the kind of response a student should hear when seeking guidance and help in kick starting their career. Regardless of the position, a career specialist or professors' opinion or belief shouldn't be a factor in whether the student deserves access to the alumni network and schools' resources.

Now, seven years later, I work full time for a law firm and part time as an adjunct teaching business to undergraduate students. The culture at colleges and universities seems to have gotten even worse, unfortunately, since I was an undergrad.

College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions.

I never want to see a student told they shouldn't pursue their goals, regardless of their personal or political beliefs. College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions. I never got access to the alumni network or schools' resources from the career services office.

Lucky for students in 2020, there are several legal organizations that help students protect their rights when an issue goes beyond what can be handled by an undergraduate facing tremendous pressure from a powerful academic institution. Organizations like Speech First and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), for instance, are resources I wish I knew about at the time.

When I experienced mistreatment from my college, I spoke up and challenged the behavior by emailing the administration and explaining what happened. I received a letter from the career services specialist apologizing for the "unprofessional comment."

What she described in that apology as a "momentary lapse of good judgement" was anything but momentary. It was indicative of the larger battle for ideas that has been happening on college campuses across the country. In the past seven years, the pressure, mistreatment and oppression of free expression have only increased. Even right now, some are raising concerns that campus administrations are using the COVID-19 pandemic to limit free speech even further. Social distancing guidelines and crowd size may both be used to limit or refuse controversial speakers.

Students often feel pressure to conform to a college or university's wishes. If they don't, they could be expelled, fail a class or experience other retribution. The college holds all the cards. On most campuses, the burden of proof for guilt in student conduct hearings is "more likely than not," making it very difficult for students to stand up for their rights without legal help.

As an adjunct professor, every student who comes to me for help in finding purpose gets my full support and my active help — even if the students' goals run counter to mine. But I have learned something crucial in my time in this role: It's not the job of an educator to dictate a student's purpose in life. I'm meant to help them achieve their dreams, no matter what.

Conner Drigotas is the Director of Communications and Development at a national law firm and is a Young Voices contributor.