Jump to content

Stop And Frisk Mike!


Gregmal
 Share

Recommended Posts

Do away with it because it worked I guess. Now we have stuff like this

 

https://nypost.com/2020/02/15/absolute-violence-tourist-slashed-in-neck-never-saw-attack-coming/

 

"Images released of the suspect show him wearing a black hat, black clothing, and white Air Jordan sneakers."

 

Gee, definitely another Jewish kid. Certainly doesnt fit good ole Mike Bloomberg's recorded "profile".

 

 

“In Washington, some elected officials don’t have the courage to stand up against special interest groups on the right and pass common-sense gun laws. And in New York City, some don’t have the courage to stand up to special interests on the left and support common-sense policing tactics like stop-and-frisk.”

 

-Mayor Mike, before entering the race to become Democratic nominee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Do away with it because it worked I guess. Now we have stuff like this

 

https://nypost.com/2020/02/15/absolute-violence-tourist-slashed-in-neck-never-saw-attack-coming/

 

"Images released of the suspect show him wearing a black hat, black clothing, and white Air Jordan sneakers."

 

Gee, definitely another Jewish kid. Certainly doesnt fit good ole Mike Bloomberg's recorded "profile".

 

 

“In Washington, some elected officials don’t have the courage to stand up against special interest groups on the right and pass common-sense gun laws. And in New York City, some don’t have the courage to stand up to special interests on the left and support common-sense policing tactics like stop-and-frisk.”

 

-Mayor Mike, before entering the race to become Democratic nominee

 

Trump supported stop and frisk in 2013 (read his tweets), and recently this year Trump tweeted that Bloomberg is a "total racist" for supporting stop and frisk, then he deleted his tweet once someone pointed out to him that it effectively makes him a "total racist" too.

 

Trump fears a Bloomberg nomination because he can't write him off as a 'socialist'.  Centrist Republicans who are fed up with Trump could vote for Bloomberg.

 

No 'leftie' is going to vote for Trump however, no matter what Bloomberg said about stop and frisk.

 

A Bloomberg nomination would beat Trump is my prediction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first I'd have agreed. Bloomberg, at least the old Mike, would have been a real threat to Trump. I may have even considered voting for him. But you can see why he doesnt stand a chance with his latest weak, and pitiful apologies and back downs brought about when hit with a barrage of criticism from the left.

 

Stop and frisk is common sense. His quote comparing the NRA and Unions is 100% spot on. But now, like the rest of them, he apologizes for everything, even his successes. This sort of nonsense is a big part of the reason people vote for Trump.

 

Oh look, more suburban Asians committing crimes!

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/17/us/chicago-shootings-children-shot/index.html

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but we already know this about Trump. He has zero problem doing something, IE criticizing Obama for golfing, and then boastfully doing it himself. If anything its one of the great highlights about how absurd our political system is.

 

Stop and frisk works and is supported by the numbers. If I wanted to fish for Walleye, I head north. I dont run to catfish territory in the bayous because its politically incorrect to say Walleyes like colder water and are known to be located in the Northeast. Look at violent crime numbers, look at profiling. It works everywhere, except when we apply it to certain of "them" everyone loses their shit. Rather than do what Mayor Mike did, and as he said, the majority do "fit a profile". This is undeniable. Same reason cops pull over hooded drivers in tricked out Toyotas/Hondas for speeding more than they do people is grey Buicks....

 

You won't ever solve a problem if you are scared to even begin to admit its origins.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is the reason people vote for Trump, as you said, I just don't see why because when it is election time Trump has the same position on this issue as Bloomberg.  You're getting the same from Trump.

 

Head to head with Bloomberg, centrist Republicans will leave Trump over matters such as Trump's notoriously unstable cabinet, the chaos at the State Department, the scandal at the DOJ, holding back Ukraine's money, and his general inability to know how to behave appropriately (tweets to intimidate witnesses while they testify, etc..).  He's an embarrassment.  He should be trying to get the two sides of Congress to work together and he's using his office for pettiness:  he fired a staffer simply for being Vindeman's twin brother!  Vindeman's brother was in charge of reviewing Bolton's book (gee, I wonder if Trump is manipulating what gets 'classified' in order to get elected).  Such a circus.

 

Bloomberg agrees with the corporate tax cuts.  I think he can get elected and actually behave like an adult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree, partially. I like Mike, especially old Mike. I am not at all liking his recent trend of apologizing for everything and pandering to these extreme left losers. If you want to solve problems, you have to be OK with pissing people off. Thats just how it is. As Mayor, he did a pretty decent job. If he is the nominee, and ever President, hopefully, that is whom we get. Not the Mike 2.0 of this last couple weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny how self-proclaimed conservatives support “stop and frisk” when it was a huge tool to circumvent the constitutional right against unlawful search and seizures.

 

Better unlawful search and seizure than unlawful violent crime. At least until people can start getting their acts together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny how self-proclaimed conservatives support “stop and frisk” when it was a huge tool to circumvent the constitutional right against unlawful search and seizures.

 

Most conservatives don’t support it. Especially in this political environment. If Bloomberg was a Republican running against and incumbent Democrat like Hillary there would be a much higher chance people would support Bloomberg. or that you could get the swing vote. I don’t see it with the current setup. You already have a “republican” in office and the economy is doing “good.” Unless the later changes I think the Trump voting base looks strong.

 

It is blatantly unconstitutional. And to Greg’s point sure it is effective. No way to really deny that. It would be even more effective if police could show up to your house unannounced without cause and search your house. Think of all the drugs, meth labs, child porn, they would find. It’s a very narrow line that’s being walked (especially on a national level). Policies like this are divisive amount parties due to the ”regionality” effectiveness. In other words individuals who live in high crime areas are much more likely to support it. And it’s somewhat understandable as it’s a policy you may be more likely to benefit from. But most of rural, Midwest etc probably won’t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK. But at the same time, if cops show up at your door and you have no criminal record and lawful permits to own your guns; no problems are likely to arise. Further, if you are in rural or smaller towns, you probably have a reputation in the community, which if good, can work for you as well. But if you are a career criminal, low life degenerate with illegal weapons... good luck Khalief. You deserve the reputation you've worked so hard to earn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other words individuals who live in high crime areas are much more likely to support it. And it’s somewhat understandable as it’s a policy you may be more likely to benefit from. But most of rural, Midwest etc probably won’t.

Was that the case? I remember when stop and frisk came out almost everyone in NYC was against it. A huge part of de Blasio's mayoral win was due to his harsh, public criticism of the program.

 

OK. But at the same time, if cops show up at your door and you have no criminal record and lawful permits to own your guns; no problems are likely to arise...But if you are a career criminal, low life degenerate with illegal weapons... good luck Khalief. You deserve the reputation you've worked so hard to earn.

 

I'm not sure what criminal reputation has anything to do with stop and frisk given that in NYC, 70% of those detained were law abiding:

 

Between 2003 and 2013, over 100,000 stops were made per year, with 685,724 people being stopped at the height of the program in 2011. The program became the subject of a racial profiling controversy. The vast majority, 90% in 2017, of those stopped were African-American or Latino, most of whom were aged 14–24. Furthermore, 70% of all those stopped were later found to be innocent.[1]

 

Perhaps "Criminal reputation" has a clause in it for skin color.  :-\

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK. But at the same time, if cops show up at your door and you have no criminal record and lawful permits to own your guns; no problems are likely to arise. Further, if you are in rural or smaller towns, you probably have a reputation in the community, which if good, can work for you as well. But if you are a career criminal, low life degenerate with illegal weapons... good luck Khalief. You deserve the reputation you've worked so hard to earn.

 

Yeah but they don’t just come knock on your door and ask how you’re doing. They bust in, tear your house apart, scare this piss out of your kids wife and leave you there to pick up the pieces. There are plenty of stories out there of firearm collectors being falsely accused of something illegal and having their home raided by the ATF, stuff confiscated for months (even though they have permits) and then dozens of hours of missed work and thousands in legal fees just to reclaim their legally owned property etc.

 

It’s a difficult thing to balance. Our judicial system is supposed to be difficult for the ones doing the enforcement. Again, I’m not saying I completely disagree with you on the effectiveness etc. it’s just doing it in a way that doesn’t violate everyone else freedom. We should try enforcing laws we already have in the books. Something like 117k people failed the current background check to purchase a firearm in 2019. Yet only 12k were investigated and about half were prosecuted. (Rough numbers from memory). My opinion is start there and use that to get a warrant. To fail a background check you have to have something legit on your record. You’re likely to find more with a follow up.

 

“Those who give up a little freedom for the sake of security are likely to lose both” (I know the quote isn’t completely in context. But the message still applies imo)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other words individuals who live in high crime areas are much more likely to support it. And it’s somewhat understandable as it’s a policy you may be more likely to benefit from. But most of rural, Midwest etc probably won’t.

Was that the case? I remember when stop and frisk came out almost everyone in NYC was against it. A huge part of de Blasio's mayoral win was due to his harsh, public criticism of the program.

 

OK. But at the same time, if cops show up at your door and you have no criminal record and lawful permits to own your guns; no problems are likely to arise...But if you are a career criminal, low life degenerate with illegal weapons... good luck Khalief. You deserve the reputation you've worked so hard to earn.

 

I'm not sure what criminal reputation has anything to do with stop and frisk given that in NYC, 70% of those detained were law abiding:

 

Between 2003 and 2013, over 100,000 stops were made per year, with 685,724 people being stopped at the height of the program in 2011. The program became the subject of a racial profiling controversy. The vast majority, 90% in 2017, of those stopped were African-American or Latino, most of whom were aged 14–24. Furthermore, 70% of all those stopped were later found to be innocent.[1]

 

Perhaps "Criminal reputation" has a clause in it for skin color.  :-\

 

I was referring to Castanza's remark about rural areas. In big cities like NYC, it shouldn't matter. Try going to the airport and making the case you shouldn't go through the metal detector or a pat down. When you are in high density areas, the safety of the whole should trump one or two folks getting butthurt.

 

And no "criminal reputation" has to do with a your rap sheet, not skin color. Check out Khalid who just slashed the French tourists throat. Upstanding citizen with no priors....

 

And again, to Castanza's point, it s a totally different ballgame if they are kicking down the doors and I am hardly for that. I'm talking about people out on public streets, not in their homes minding their own business.

 

Then this from LC....

Between 2003 and 2013, over 100,000 stops were made per year, with 685,724 people being stopped at the height of the program in 2011. The program became the subject of a racial profiling controversy. The vast majority, 90% in 2017, of those stopped were African-American or Latino, most of whom were aged 14–24. Furthermore, 70% of all those stopped were later found to be innocent.[1]

 

70% of those stopped where innocent? OK. So that means 30% weren't! Thats totally fucking stunning! 3/10! Do know how quick pretty much all crime could be wiped out if you found a pocket of participants where 3/10 where criminals? That is so far above the national averages its insane and hard to imagine you think you're making a point by saying, "oh, 7/10 were innocent".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

70% of those stopped where innocent? OK. So that means 30% weren't! Thats totally fucking stunning! 3/10! Do know how quick pretty much all crime could be wiped out if you found a pocket of participants where 3/10 where criminals? That is so far above the national averages its insane and hard to imagine you think you're making a point by saying, "oh, 7/10 were innocent".

 

Believe me, the feeling is mutual that you think it's acceptable.

 

Actually turns out Wikipedia was not the most coherent in that paragraph I quoted (not that it really matters IMHO)

Here are the source statistics:

https://www.nyclu.org/en/stop-and-frisk-data

 

The height in 2011:

In 2011, 685,724 NYPD stops were recorded.

605,328 were innocent (88 percent).

 

Five years later:

In 2016, 12,404 NYPD stops were recorded.

9,394 were innocent (76 percent).

 

Another thing to realize is prior to 2018, marijuana was a criminal offense in NYC.

In 2011, the NYPD made more than 50,680 arrests for the lowest-level marijuana possession offense

In 2016 New York Police Department arrested 18,136 people for marijuana possession

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Patted down and went on their way"

 

Never seen a police shakedown in the hood, eh? 4 cops. 2 with hands on their guns or guns drawn pointed downwards, 1 with his forearm in the small of your back and his other hand around your neck, side of your face pressed up against brick. Last cop "patting you down" i.e. going through your pockets. Hope you aren't carrying loose cash.

 

Read the lawsuit complaints. This is the "good" version. The other version consists of gun barrels against your body. It was a shakedown of poor black neighborhoods to throw 20 year old black guys in jail for weed. Gestapo tactics.

 

But none of this really matters because the practice is both unconstitutional and ineffective - in fact it probably does more harm than good considering the racial and neighborhood bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Patted down and went on their way"

 

Never seen a police shakedown in the hood, eh? 4 cops. 2 with hands on their guns or guns drawn pointed downwards, 1 with his forearm in the small of your back and his other hand around your neck, side of your face pressed up against brick. Last cop "patting you down" i.e. going through your pockets. Hope you aren't carrying loose cash.

 

Read the lawsuit complaints. This is the "good" version. The other version consists of gun barrels against your body. It was a shakedown of poor black neighborhoods to throw 20 year old black guys in jail for weed. Gestapo tactics.

 

But none of this really matters because the practice is both unconstitutional and ineffective - in fact it probably does more harm than good considering the racial and neighborhood bias.

 

If crime is that prevalent(3/10) in those areas, then the 70% should just consider it taking one for the team. Short term inconvenience to better the community and get bad guys off the streets making their lives safer, longer term. At those kind of rates they are likely bound to becoming a statistic one way or the other. Better off alive and frisked than some of the alternatives. Throat cut like the French tourist. Dead like Tessa Majors. In the slammer with Rashan. Take your pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is bad policy if true:

 

The marijuana arrest rate is particularly alarming because only “public view” possession of marijuana is a crime in New York City. It is reportedly a common practice to ask suspects to take everything out of their pockets after a police stop, and then arrest those who reveal marijuana on the theory that it is now in “public view.”

https://thinkprogress.org/nypd-stop-and-frisks-lead-to-more-marijuana-arrests-than-anything-else-ded577a3b345/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is legal to frisk them if the police reasonably suspect a weapon, however when frisked a weapon was only found 2 percent of the time.

 

 

The NYCLU’s study also found that, “[t]hough frisks can be legally conducted only when an officer reasonably suspects the person has a weapon that might endanger officer safety, 55.8 percent of those stopped in 2012 were frisked. Of those frisked, a weapon was found only 2 percent of the time.”

 

https://thinkprogress.org/nypd-stop-and-frisks-lead-to-more-marijuana-arrests-than-anything-else-ded577a3b345/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea the whole thing was a mess publicly. Everyone knew it was total bullshit - well everyone who took the subway (save maybe the old russian babushkas who didn't give a damn what happened outside Brighton). The part about public view of weed is absolutely true and all the black guys spread that word around real quick to keep their shit together. Surprisingly the sketchy hipster/homeless white guys on the G train never had this problem; nor did the wall street/midtown bros with cocaine nosejobs for them and their girlfriends. But ya know, institutional racism doesn't exist, liberal elites just looking for a reason to bitch and moan, this is all just blown out of proportion, blah blah blah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny how self-proclaimed conservatives support “stop and frisk” when it was a huge tool to circumvent the constitutional right against unlawful search and seizures.

 

Better unlawful search and seizure than unlawful violent crime. At least until people can start getting their acts together.

 

I love reading your posts in general but I can't believe this coming from you. It's a dangerous slippery slope. The libertarian in me is terrified of something like "stop and frisk".

 

Slippery slope. I feel the same way about this as I do about NSA wiretapping, started under Bush. Obama came in promising to stop it yet he doubled down. All in the name of preventing violent crime in this case terrorism.

 

Once the government takes away your rights, they just want to take away more.

 

Stop and frisk has been ruled constitutional; but I agree with the sentiment of how it can be a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Note it was ruled unconstitutional in NYC because it was determined that NYPD was racial profiling, the act itself of stopping and frisking was not considered a violation of the Constitution.

 

I don't even have a problem with Bloomberg's comments about targeting minority communities because that's where the crime is. It's just statistics.

 

Anyway, I'm in full support of him as a candidate. He'd make a great President. So he apologized, it's politics and you have to appease people sometimes for votes. He needs those socialist (communist) votes if he does win the nomination.

 

Incidentally I just got frisked by the TSA this past week, my first time ever under their new aggressive frisking procedure. It was done by this asshole authoritative agent who clearly wanted to flaunt his power in his uniform. I just had to stand there and take it while he padded my privates. Should have recorded it or asked for a supervisor. And I get it I'm giving up my rights to be able to fly. But still felt absolutely gross.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine going down your street and 3/10 of your neighbors are criminals! There were like 3 crimes committed per thousand people in my town all of last year and one violent crime per like 5,000!

 

I would be careful with statistics. What were the 30% guilty apprehended for? A joint in the pocket? If the police is allowed to kick in the door of your door and search your house from basement to attic they may find something too. Once cops are searching something or someone, they have a great incentive to find a crime or a criminal.

 

The Nazi’s were very good to keep crimes low (except the ones they committed themselves) and so was Cuba (I visited Cuba on in the nineties and it was described as the safest place on earth).

 

Which gets me to another pet peeve, the Patriot act. Never since WW2 us the government been given such sweeping rights to intrude on privacy. I also admire the genius of calling it patriot act, implying they those who are against it are the opposite. The Nazis couldn’t have done any better in their day. How many terrorist have been caught using this law for the right to spy on the entire population almost unchecked? These type of laws, if they ever get approved, should come with an expiration date, but they never do.

 

End of rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...