Everything we do affects us all

August 12, 2013

'STOP STOP AND FRISK!' Federal Judge Says!

Though I admire Mayor Bloomberg for many things this law has always been the most brutally unfair law in America and thank God it may be coming to an end! Can you imagine the vast number of unnecessary arrests that have occurred because an innocent 'victim' of this unfair stop and frisk law was unable to control themselves and cursed out the police or resisted frisking?! A sickeningly unfair law indeed. Now if we could just shut down these insane 'right to carry' laws that are plaguing our nation. If you have a right to carry a gun you should at least be required to carry pepper spray too and use that as a first resort.  http://ChipShirley.Com/

-----------------------------------

Reuters-

N.Y. police's 'stop-and-frisk' tactics violates rights, judge rules

Photo
11:09am EDT
By Bernard Vaughan
NEW YORK (Reuters) - In a stinging rebuke to the Bloomberg administration, a federal judge ruled on Monday that the New York City Police's "stop and frisk" crime-fighting tactics violate the constitutional rights of minorities, despite claims by the mayor and police commissioner that it has driven down rates of violent crime.
U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled that the police adopted a policy of "indirect racial profiling" by targeting racially defined groups for stops, resulting in the disproportionate, discriminatory stopping of tens of thousands of blacks and Hispanics, and that the city's highest officials "turned a blind eye" toward this result, she said.
"No one should live in fear of being stopped whenever he leaves his home to go about the activities of daily life," Scheindlin wrote in her opinion.
Police personnel felt or were aware of pressure to increase the number of stops when Mayor Michael Bloomberg took office in 2002 and brought in Raymond Kelly to be NYPD Commissioner, the judge wrote.
As a result, officers often frisked young minority men for weapons or searched their pockets for contraband before letting them go, in a violation of the Constitution's Fourth Amendment that protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, the judge said in a 195-page decision.
A 2012 New York Civil Liberties Union report showed a sharp, steady increase in police stops over the course of Bloomberg's three terms in office - to 685,724 in 2011 from 160,851 stops in 2003, with about half of the 2011 stops resulting in physical searches.
Bloomberg and Kelly countered that the practice has driven down violent crime and limited the number of illegal guns being carried on the streets on New York.
Scheindlin's major decision follows an exhaustive nine-week trial that ended in May that pitted the NYPD's interest in keeping New York's crime rate down against black and Latino plaintiffs who felt discriminated against. Scheindlin presided over the trial without a jury.
The NYPD did not immediately comment on the decision.
As part of her ruling, Scheindlin ordered the appointment of an independent monitor to oversee compliance with other remedies she ordered.
The other remedies include the NYPD adopting a written policy specifying circumstances where stops are authorized; adopt a trial program requiring the use of body-worn cameras in one precinct in each of the city's five boroughs; and to set up a community-based remedial process under a court-appointed facilitator.
(Reporting by Bernard Vaughan, Chris Francescani, Jonathan Stempel; Editing by Philip Barbara)

8 comments:

  1. "Now if we could just shut down these insane 'right to carry' laws that are plaguing our nation".

    Ummm ... Until "liberals" came along trying to disarm the American public the right to defend oneself and ones property was common sense and protected by the 2nd Amendment.

    Because of "liberals" that 2nd Amendment right had to become additionally legislated to protect it.

    Understand? Liberals forced right to carry and stand your ground laws.

    What don't you understand about the 2nd Amendment anyway?

    Why don't you understand that gun control laws only affect law abiding citizens ... leaving them defenseless?

    In the UK, before they took peoples guns away the cops were famous for walking their beats unarmed ... with nightstick only. Now, after they've disarmed law abiding citizens the cops often carry automatic weapons.

    Worked really great huh?

    Why do you people always believe what the media and democrats (same thing) tell you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, in England most police are still unarmed and their murder rate is tiny compared to ours. PLUS even in the old west most saloons required people to check their guns at the door...not with today's insane laws in many states.

      Delete
    2. There rates are lower in England because of multiple factors, mostly being demographics, and what they consider a murder. If there's not a conviction they do not count it as a murder, also if multiple murders occured it is only counted as a single murder. It is not because police are unarmed. Perhaps there are unarmed police because the murder rate is so low. But the people that are unarmed are just street police. They do have a firearms division to handle the more violent crimes, and police to carry guns in certain places. But, yeah, lets go ahead and take away guns from all of our police officers. And you can personally visit every officer's surviving family to tell them how their husband/mother/daddy died in the line of duty because they couldn't protect themselves. I'm sure we'll be a much better and safer country.

      And even today you can't walk into a bar with a gun in the states, even with a permit, aside for 4 states which have started to allow it. This is the worst political blog I've seen. You really never seem to know what you're talking about. I do, however, find it amusing and entertaining. It's just scary that someone might be ignorant enough believe anything you say.

      Delete
    3. Most American cities have the exact same way of calculating murders-Meaning we don't count them without a conviction either. That's terrible. I remember distinctly when Atlanta and other US cities made that change 25r years ago. That's the only reason our murder rates appear to have diminished as our incarceration rate has skyrocketed to 600% higher per-capita than it was in 1970.

      Delete
  2. Here's an article from 2009. My point was disarming law abiding people just leaves armed criminals. Arming British police is a growing trend because gun laws have no effect on violent criminals and gangs.

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/33448132/ns/world_news-europe/t/some-british-bobbies-gun-comes-job/

    American law enforcement believes the exact opposite of democrats and the left. Unless you can pay for 24 hour personal security the first line of defense is you. A 2013 survey of 15,000 law enforcement officers (ignored by the media, naturally) ...

    http://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/6183787-PoliceOnes-Gun-Control-Survey-11-key-lessons-from-officers-perspectives/

    Guns are not the problem. Disintegrating families and values is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's both...and mainly the drug war...
      World War III truly is the Drug War-A cancer on the Americas:
      The FDA (Food and Drug Administration) must allow the AMA (American Medical Association) to be in charge of the 'drug issue' by giving doctors access to these drugs for treatment purposes. We are dooming our civilization by empowering Drug Lords like Arab Kings.

      If the DEA/FDA reschedules coca, poppy and pot and derivatives, so that doctors have access to these drugs for treatment purposes then we will be able to make quick progress towards deflating the South American and Afghanistan drug empires and the US prison incarceration rate which has gone up 500% (from 100 citizens incarcerated per 100 thousand to 600 per 100k) since 1972!

      World War III truly is the Drug War when you consider the fact that illegal drugs are the funding mechanism for major terrorism and rogue government leaders. And our confused policies have been a cancer on all of the Americas for decades.

      Delete
  3. The FDA is a government bureaucracy and will not cede power (at least under a democrat administration). That's the problem with growing government, it never stops growing or grabbing power.

    I lean towards the decriminalization of drugs. Decriminalizing drugs would have the same effect getting rid of Prohibition did. It destroyed the bootlegging empire Prohibition created.

    Middle East oil funds everything. Yes it's supplemented by drugs. American has the largest supply of fossil fuels in the world. We could become energy independent and sell to other countries. The Middle East would collapse. The left doesn't want that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think I'll start calling myself a 'Middle American' because most of us have way more in common than not.

      I want the oil and the drug issue dealt with. I wish PBO would do both. Peace

      Delete