Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't "defend" a soul on here, littleminas. I agree with certain people at times. You notice certain ones because there are such a select few rational thinkers on here, most of whom hardly post (S.I.B., Gantz, anon [although he posts pretty regularly]). And you do the same thing in terms of "defending" (if you need to put it that way) anything you view awesomely progressive by all of "your men" on here. It's the same thing, buddy. And yes, you converse more effeminate than most of the women on here (like putting your e-hand up and saying "please"). It's f'n bizarre because you claim to not be gay. Also, I'm not on the job. But I know the beef between PD and FD. I just laugh about it. There's nothing really to say on the matter. It's always gonna be that way. You would never understand something like that.
All I know is that you don't dare contradict you bf even when he calls your job BS. Like I said you're a submissive chick. LoL
Glad to hear that this is changing. But about that statistic that only 12% lead to arrest. I could be wrong but aren't the police allowed to detain someone if they have no ID on them? I wonder how many of the detainments were because the person simply didn't have ID rather because they were actually carrying drugs or weapons.
Glad to hear that this is changing. But about that statistic that only 12% lead to arrest. I could be wrong but aren't the police allowed to detain someone if they have no ID on them? I wonder how many of the detainments were because the person simply didn't have ID rather because they were actually carrying drugs or weapons.
No, you can't detain someone simply because they have no id on them. If that what true, the homeless situation would be solvable by arrest all homeless people (and that would be a terrible idea, not in support of it). However, if someone has an offense like urinating outside, jay walking, littering, sleeping in restricted areas, etc., that would normally simply get a ticket if you had an id on you, if you don't have an id on you THEN the police are permitted to detain you. But they cannot randomly stop people and arrest you just because you have no id.
Heard Ray Kelly was out speaking against the ruling over the weekend. Good for him and it's good that he's taking a stance against that idiotic judge. Let's see her work the streets and see how successful she would be in keeping crime down without Stop and Frisk.
The judge basically said - "go do a better job of identifying criminals, no short-cuts. Do it the hard, but the right (I.e. Constitutional) way".
The problem is that doing it the hard way will cost more money, and less deterrent will result in more crime.
And we already know how much fiscal ca-ca this city is in, so I would like to hear what all of the Stop and Frisk opponents have to say about that? It's easy to yell that they're against Stop and Frisk, but what would they do to deter crime without hiring more cops?
LISTEN YOU ALL, THE JUDGE HAS DETERMINED THAT STOP AND FRISK IS ILLEGAL. THE IDEA IS TO STOP AND FRISK ANYONE DEEMED OF SUSPISOUS BEHAVIOR AND/Or HAVE SOLID EVIDENCE THAT THE PERSON HAS OR WILL SOON COMMIT A CRIME.
THe NYPD misunderstood this and "stop anyone that looks like they commit crimes" and used bad judment 90% of time.
She said while stop and frisk was legal if it were done correctly, the NYPD is racist and cant handle a proper stop and frisk program.
They routinelly stop 10 people and statistically 9 are clean and ok And only 1 may have a gun or drugs. Therefore the NYPD is wrong (as they usually are) in actualizing and determining who should be stopped and why.
But the stop was still made...so the judge asked what determed this stop to be made .
This is where racist cops come in . The stops are usually made based on skin color. Which is ILLEGAL
I LOVE this judge in having a clear mind and now I can walk down the street and be calm and know that my $20 weed bag will not be confiscated !
Thank you Judge !!!! This is huge for minoritites that are subject to this everyday.
Next she will tackle discrimination in the NYCHA !!
SHE SHOULD RUN FOR MAYOR !!!!
Maybe the odds are even better, the person stop may have intended to do a crime but gets spooked by the stop and frisk. In your case, you are least likely to carry a large amount of drugs in public. The point of the program is to prevent crime.
Exactly. For the most part stop and frisk is sloppy police work. Go to where the crime is, and flood the housing authority with cops.
And do what exactly? I still have yet to hear anyone come up with a way to fight crime without increasing the police force, especially seeing that there is limited funding.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
