Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-22-2013, 04:20 PM
 
Location: Northern CA
12,770 posts, read 11,570,059 times
Reputation: 4262

Advertisements

Wow, this is big. Wonder why the news media are ignoring it.
They love stories on racial discrimination, don't they?

Quote:
The claims were made as part of a landmark class action lawsuit that began Monday. The suit seeks to prove that the nation's largest police department has demonstrated a widespread and systemic pattern of unconstitutional stops that disproportionately target minorities.

The trial represents a historic challenge to the legacies of NYPD commissioner Ray Kelly and mayor Michael Bloomberg, who have both vocally supported stop-and-frisk.

Officer Adhyl Polanco began his testimony Tuesday by saying "there's a difference between" the department's policies on paper and "what goes on out there", on the city's streets.
Polanco testified that in 2009, officers in his Bronx precinct were expected to issue 20 summons and make one arrest per month. If they did not they would risk denied vacation, being separated from longtime partners, undesirable assignments and other consequences.

In one recording played for the court, a man Polanco claimed was a NYPD captain told officers: "the summons is a money–generating machine for the city."
NYPD officers testify stop-and-frisk policy driven by quota system and race | World news | guardian.co.uk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2013, 04:22 PM
 
45,235 posts, read 26,464,208 times
Reputation: 24995
Stop and frisk is unconstitutional, no matter race.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2013, 04:25 PM
 
Location: Soldotna
2,256 posts, read 2,132,064 times
Reputation: 1079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Stop and frisk is unconstitutional, no matter race.
This^^^^

Not a racial issue bit a constitutional issue.

Therefore, low ratings because Amurikuns no longer care about the constitution or even know what it says.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2013, 04:42 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,462,250 times
Reputation: 6541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Stop and frisk is unconstitutional, no matter race.
Not according to Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). The Supreme Court held that law enforcement may detain anyone who they have a reasonable suspiscion, that they can articulate, that a crime was committed, in the process of being committed, or will be committed. The law enforcement officer may also search those being detained for their own safety. No warrant is necessary. It is also known as a "Terry Stop."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2013, 04:47 PM
 
Location: Texas
5,872 posts, read 8,097,596 times
Reputation: 2971
Terry stops & the stop and frisk are two VERY different procedures. The stop & frisk does not require reasonable suspicion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2013, 04:47 PM
 
Location: Soldotna
2,256 posts, read 2,132,064 times
Reputation: 1079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
Not according to Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). The Supreme Court held that law enforcement may detain anyone who they have a reasonable suspiscion, that they can articulate, that a crime was committed, in the process of being committed, or will be committed. The law enforcement officer may also search those being detained for their own safety. No warrant is necessary.
You misinterpret...

Stop and frisk allows stops without reasonable articulable suspicion.

Cops CANNOT frisk during consensual encounters and all encounters started without RAS are by definition consensual because you cannot be detained in a Terry stop without RAS.

And a federal judge has already ruled it unconstitutional once.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2013, 05:44 PM
 
Location: Northern CA
12,770 posts, read 11,570,059 times
Reputation: 4262
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonymouseX View Post
This^^^^

Not a racial issue bit a constitutional issue.

Therefore, low ratings because Amurikuns no longer care about the constitution or even know what it says.
yes it is

Quote:
On a track played Thursday, Deputy Inspector Christopher McCormack was heard telling Serrano he needed to stop "the right people, the right time, the right location". When asked what he believed McCormack meant Serrano told the court: "he meant blacks and Hispanics."
Later in the tape McCormack says: "I have no problem telling you this … male blacks. And I told you at roll call, and I have no problem [to] tell you this, male blacks 14 to 21."
Serrano claims his attempts to raise concerns about stop and frisk and the existence of quotas have been met with retaliation, including fellow officers vandalizing his locker with stickers of rats.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2013, 06:00 PM
 
Location: USA
13,255 posts, read 12,133,458 times
Reputation: 4228
I've been against this since its onset. It's bad enough to be harassed while driving in this country, can't believe they decided to further infringe on minority's rights by stopping and frisking on foot now. It truly does feel like a police state at times.


I'm glad to see people support getting rid of the law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2013, 06:04 PM
 
Location: Soldotna
2,256 posts, read 2,132,064 times
Reputation: 1079
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper View Post
yes it is
You aren't seeing the big picture.

What the government does to blacks and hispanics it does to everyone else later.

So while there is a racial component it is essentially a constitutional issue because eventually the NYPD will use it on everyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2013, 06:10 PM
 
Location: Northern CA
12,770 posts, read 11,570,059 times
Reputation: 4262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe View Post
I've been against this since its onset. It's bad enough to be harassed while driving in this country, can't believe they decided to further infringe on minority's rights by stopping and frisking on foot now. It truly does feel like a police state at times.


I'm glad to see people support getting rid of the law.
And what's great about this G, is that fellow officers are testifying against this program. Yeah, now that's bravery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:26 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top