Stop & Frisk Thread

[B-Man]

Did I miss Hillary’s vehement opposition to stop-and-frisk when she was Senator from NY and crime was dropping?

 

 

 

As to the constitutionality of stop and frisk, as Rudy Giuliani aptly points out:

Stop and frisk is based on an 8-1 decision by the Supreme Court, Terry v. Ohio. That ruling hasn't been overturned or even modified by the court since it was handed down in 1968. Stop ad frisk is constitutional and the law of the land. The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, approved the constitutionality of stopping a suspect if te police officer as a reasonable suspicion tat a person has committed , or was about to commit, a crime. If the officer also has a reasonable suspicion the person is armed, he can conduct a pat-down -- that is, a frisk -- of a person's outer clothing.

 

In may places, this practice is called a 'Terry stop,' based on the decision upholding its constitutionality. it is a police technique used by all law enforcement agencies nationwide.

 

 

 

Critics of stop and frisk think they have wiggle room to obscure the issue with a 2013 federal court ruling that said New York City's application of stop and frisk violated the Fourth Amendment rights of minorities. To be clear, this ruling applied to New York City and New York City alone. This ruling, handed down by Judge Shira Scheindlin, a 1994 Clinton appointee, is no doubt what Holt had in mind when he chastised Trump during the debate............But that not the end of the story.

As The Wall Street Journal reported:

The federal judge in the stop and frisk case was Shira Scheindlin, a notorious police critic whose behavior got her taken off the case by the Second Circuit of Appeals. The appellate court put it this way:

'Upon review of the record in these cases we conclude that the District Judge ran afoul of the code of conduct for United States Judges ... and that the appearance of impartiality surrounding this litigation was compromised by the District Judge's improper application of the Court's 'related case rule' ….

 

 

Continuing:

In a follow up opinion, the appellate court judges cited a New Yorker interview with Judge Scheindlin that included a quote from a former law clerk saying, ''what you have to remember about the judge is that she thinks cops lie."

 

 

 

In other words, the court decision against NYC's stop and frisk was tainted with judicial bias and incompetence.

The appellate court then handed the case to an impartial judge.

But as luck would have it, Mayor Bloomberg was replaced by über-left-wing Mayor Bill de Blasio, who decided not to appeal the original court decision. (Who says elections don't count?)

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/10/

[ExiledInIllinois]

Please explain why we should be bringing refugees in to this county. Other than a feel good gesture what is the benefit?

Call it a feel good sonnet, engraved in bronze from the Mutha of all exiles:

 

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

 

In contrast to:

 

"I met a traveller from an antique land

Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone

Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,

Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,

And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,

Tell that its sculptor well those passions read

Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,

The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:

And on the pedestal these words appear:

'My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:

Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!'

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare

The lone and level sands stretch far away"

[Chef Jim]

Call it a feel good sonnet, engraved in bronze from the Mutha of all exiles:

 

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

"

So other than a feel good gesture what is the benefit of being the worlds caretaker for those who cannot take care of themselves? That was the question that I posed that you did not answer.

[ExiledInIllinois]

So other than a feel good gesture what is the benefit of being the worlds caretaker for those who cannot take care of themselves? That was the question that I posed that you did not answer.

I think I did answer. Call it feel good if you want. I consider the cornerstone for providing liberty to the rest of the world more than feel good.

 

And you didn't quote "Ozymandias" by Shelley. That is what we are staring @ if we don't provide that liberty as stated in "The New Colossus."

 

Our destruction is hardly "feel good."

Edited October 2, 2016 by ExiledInIllinois

[Chef Jim]

I think I did answer. Call it feel good if you want. I consider the cornerstone for providing liberty to the rest of the world more than feel good.

 

And you didn't quote "Ozymandias" by Shelley. That is what we are staring @ if we don't provide that liberty as stated in "The New Colossus."

 

Our destruction is hardly "feel good."

Why is it our cornerstone to provide liberty to the rest of the world?

[ExiledInIllinois]

Why is it our cornerstone to provide liberty to the rest of the world?

Impossible to live long in a bubble, a protective shell behind a wall.

 

"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto"

[Chef Jim]

Impossible to live long in a bubble, a protective shell behind a wall.

 

If you have no idea or opinion as to why we should be the world's social caregivers just say so.

[ExiledInIllinois]

If you have no idea or opinion as to why we should be the world's social caregivers just say so.

Huh?

 

We can't live for long in a protective state. That's the reason.

 

Now shouldn't we be getting ready to follow a Bills beatdown?

 

;-)

[Prickly Pete]

Impossible to live long in a bubble, a protective shell behind a wall.

 

"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto"

 

 

I am 100% for helping humanity, but the best way to help Mexicans, is to improve the conditions in Mexico, and the same for any other country's people.

 

There is no way to save the world through immigration, and disabling the US while trying to save the world, or allowing immigration to be used as a tool to subjugate the US citizens is really !@#$ing foolish.

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

 

 

I am 100% for helping humanity, but the best way to help Mexicans, is to improve the conditions in Mexico, and the same for any other country's people.

 

There is no way to save the world through immigration, and disabling the US while trying to save the world, or allowing immigration to be used as a tool to subjugate the US citizens is really !@#$ing foolish.

 

It isn't about saving the world. It is about keeping our ideals of liberty intact. Edited October 2, 2016 by ExiledInIllinois

[Prickly Pete]

It isn't about saving the world. It is about keeping our ideals of liberty intact.

 

Your dreaming of some sort of Panacea.

 

 

You can't import a massive amount of Muslims (who have a different set of ideals) and expect to keep liberty intact. It can only happen slowly.

 

 

There has been conflict between the West and Muslim nations for hundreds of years, it's not reasonable to expect a sudden change.

 

 

And you do understand how the US government has been going about their business? Knowing that, yet waxing about "our ideals" is a bit much.

 

Hillary has played a direct role in implementing the policies that have created the refugee problem. Angela Merkel invited any and all to come into the EU (without out any of it's citizens having any say in the matter). Saudi Arabia says " we can't accept refugees because they might be a threat, but we will give them money to set up in your countries, and build mosques". Israel does the same.

 

Lot's of different agenda's coming together there.

 

I guess it's up to the citizens of the US and the EU, to accept that terrorism is just a fact of life, and to open our hearts, pocketbooks, and borders, to help the people that these politicians are foisting on us, or we are all racists.

 

 

 

I don't know what else to say.

Edited October 2, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[Prickly Pete]

You should ask Ozymandius to the prom.

​

I think you are on Hillary's payroll, Mister 377.

 

How many posts do you have on the Stadium Wall?

Edited October 2, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[Chef Jim]

Huh?

 

We can't live for long in a protective state. That's the reason.

 

Now shouldn't we be getting ready to follow a Bills beatdown?

 

;-)

To your first point. You've not answered the question. That does not answer the question of what do we stand to gain by taking the world's poor. You're tap dancing around my question.

 

To your second point. Nah.

[Nanker]

It isn't about saving the world. It is about keeping our ideals of liberty intact.

So you hate black and colored people of the world.

[KD in CA]

 

This. Stop and frisk has had some demonstrably good results with regard to reducing street crime, but you just can't stop and search someone with no probable cause - and looking out of place or like a thug isn't probable cause. I would think that libertarians, conservatives, and liberals would all be in agreement on this.

Why isn't looking like a thug who is out of place (or hanging around a known drug corner with a bulge in his waistband) probable cause? The level of success of the program in NYC shows police were able to identify likely offenders based on a variety of factors.

 

No issue with the policy here. The only people disproportionately impacted are criminals.

[Magox]

​

I think you are on Hillary's payroll, Mister 377.

 

How many posts do you have on the Stadium Wall?

 

He's posted plenty on this site just under different pseudonym's and he's one of the more reasonable posters that frequents the site.

[TH3]

Your dreaming of some sort of Panacea.

 

 

You can't import a massive amount of Muslims (who have a different set of ideals) and expect to keep liberty intact. It can only happen slowly.

 

 

There has been conflict between the West and Muslim nations for hundreds of years, it's not reasonable to expect a sudden change.

 

 

And you do understand how the US government has been going about their business? Knowing that, yet waxing about "our ideals" is a bit much.

 

Hillary has played a direct role in implementing the policies that have created the refugee problem. Angela Merkel invited any and all to come into the EU (without out any of it's citizens having any say in the matter). Saudi Arabia says " we can't accept refugees because they might be a threat, but we will give them money to set up in your countries, and build mosques". Israel does the same.

 

Lot's of different agenda's coming together there.

 

I guess it's up to the citizens of the US and the EU, to accept that terrorism is just a fact of life, and to open our hearts, pocketbooks, and borders, to help the people that these politicians are foisting on us, or we are all racists.

 

 

 

I don't know what else to say.

Oh. I am sure you will say something

[TakeYouToTasker]

Typical... Nothing left but name calling.

 

Sorry to bother you oh busy constitutional scholar... All the policy makers must make you schedule hell...

 

Nothing left to give as usual... Now run away, again.

 

 

Hey... TYTT... What's your constitutional take on stop & frisk? You're the USC scholar here.

 

I'm not name calling. I'm stating that anyone who believes the Constitution makes clear way for the practice of a Religion which subjugates the Constitution itself to a religious text which demands it's be the guiding rule of law (Sharia), is an idiot.

 

I'll ask you again: explain how the Constitution doesn't address this issue.

[Azalin]

Why isn't looking like a thug who is out of place (or hanging around a known drug corner with a bulge in his waistband) probable cause? The level of success of the program in NYC shows police were able to identify likely offenders based on a variety of factors.

 

No issue with the policy here. The only people disproportionately impacted are criminals.

 

I never said anything about it not being probable cause if it looked as if you had a concealed weapon or were hanging out on a street corner known for it's drug activity. Situations like that can reasonably be considered to be probable cause. Simply looking "out of place" shouldn't be.

[Joe Miner]

 

I never said anything about it not being probable cause if it looked as if you had a concealed weapon or were hanging out on a street corner known for it's drug activity. Situations like that can reasonably be considered to be probable cause. Simply looking "out of place" shouldn't be.

That's a fine line to draw and probably the crux of most of the arguments.

 

No one stopped because of probable cause ever thinks they were doing something suspicious. And on the flip side innocent people don't like getting harassed because of probable cause.

 

Since this country is void of leadership, we'll just kick this on down the road and publicize any events that support the point of view we're trying to portray at the moment.