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 voted yes, but I think it should be done in at risk areas, to keep crime down in those areas. They should be living in peace as well and cops should be very proactive in those at risk places to make sure people can enjoy their lives.
Given Michael Bloomberg's comments regarding who should be stopped and frisked, and Trump having said he supports Stop & Frisk (and called for it to be expanded nationwide), what do you think? Should it be expanded throughout the USA?
By the way, I will chime in, and I'm not holding back on what I say.
Stop in frisk is an insult to freedom, our Constitution and our way of life.
I voted yes, but I think it should be done in at risk areas, to keep crime down in those areas. They should be living in peace as well and cops should be very proactive in those at risk places to make sure people can enjoy their lives.
There are poor white areas with high crime rates... stop and frisk never seems to be an option... Wonder why?
Absolutely no... it is unconstitutional and an insult to all Americans.
Given Michael Bloomberg's comments regarding who should be stopped and frisked, and Trump having said he supports Stop & Frisk (and called for it to be expanded nationwide), what do you think? Should it be expanded throughout the USA?
By the way, I will chime in, and I'm not holding back on what I say.
I'd love to see Trump being frisked. I'd be happy either to see him obliged to endure the kind of indignities that ordinary Americans go through, but I'd also like to see his finances "frisked."
I disagree. It violates the 4th amendment. You need probable cause to stop and search someone. Pulling someone over because they fit a particular demographic is unconstitutional, not to mention bigoted.
And here is something to consider. Most people who were stopped and frisked were not found to be doing anything wrong.
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
I'd love to see Trump being frisked. I'd be happy either to see him obliged to endure the kind of indignities that ordinary Americans go through, but I'd also like to see his finances "frisked."
But then, you must understand Trump. When it comes to this matter, he has no empathy. He won't like being frisked. However, he will gladly advocate stop and frisk nationwide. He has ways of avoiding it.
Like any profession, the police have limited resources and time. What makes more sense - to stop and frisk young black and hispanic males, or to do the same with little old ladies going to church?
People have a right to live in a safe neighborhood, don't they?
How about not having S&F in the first place. Why should I be willing to have my 4th amendment rights/civil liberties violated? How would it help me to deal with a race-based police state?
I voted no. Unless there is plausible cause to search you, you should not be stopped or frisked. I've been in sketchy areas where there was alot of crime. I'm still against it.
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.
