- Thread starter
- #141
So that is a no, you are not going to address the points. Not really surprised.And here you are repeating a statement that I already agreed with and have no problem with. None of the above has anything to do with my contention because I acknowledge those facts and agreed with your assessment of them. You are trying to hide behind those facts so that you do not have to address the actual point which has nothing to do with what you stated above.Just because you say it is false does not make it so. It is a FACT that the policy does not require resonable suspicion as that is why it was struck.1. "That is the problem with stop and frisk policy. It does not require any reasonable suspicion."
False.
Personal insults, the last bastion of those without an argument. try again. I explained the problem with the case you cited.2. I explained the meaning of "The Constitutioin is not a suicide pact."
I provided the Supreme Court Decision that provides police with the authority to stop those whom they deem suspicious.
There are folks for whom reality is not a factor in their world views....and you appear to be one.
Explain or address what? None of that is material to the discussion at hand. I have no issues with the fact that black people are stopped more than other races. I have no issue with the fact that police have a larger presence in high crime arias as they should and certainly do not care what the race of the individuals in those neighborhoods are. None of that is the problem with stop and frisk. The problem is that we have a constitution that protects the rights of Americans and that includes the protection from the state simply stopping you and performing a search without just cause.3. I wonder if you would care to explain, and address the following:
a. "Every year, approximately 6,000 blacks are murdered. This is a number greater than white and Hispanic homicide victims combined, even though blacks are only 13 percent of the national population.
Blacks are killed at six times the rate of whites and Hispanics combined. In Los Angeles, blacks between the ages of 20 and 24 die at a rate 20 to 30 times the national mean.
Who is killing them?
Not the police, and not white civilians, but other blacks. The astronomical black death-by-homicide rate is a function of the black crime rate. Black males between the ages of 14 and 17 commit homicide at ten times the rate of white and Hispanic male teens combined. Blacks of all ages commit homicide at eight times the rate of whites and Hispanics combined, and at eleven times the rate of whites alone." The Danger of the “Black Lives Matter” Movement
b. And this....
"Blacks make up 23 percent of New York City’s population, but they commit 75 percent of all shootings, 70 percent of all robberies, and 66 percent of all violent crime, according to victims and witnesses.
Add Hispanic shootings and you account for 98 percent of all illegal gunfire in the city. Whites are 33 percent of the city’s population, but they commit fewer than two percent of all shootings, four percent of all robberies, and five percent of all violent crime.
[Don't even bother looking for Asian crime statistics.]
These disparities mean that virtually every time the police in New York are called out on a gun run—meaning that someone has just been shot—they are being summoned tominority neighborhoods looking for minority suspects.
c. The geographic disparities are also huge. In Brownsville, Brooklyn, the per capita shooting rate is 81 times higher than in nearby Bay Ridge, Brooklyn—the first neighborhood predominantly black, the second neighborhood predominantly white and Asian. As a result, police presence and use of proactive tactics are much higher in Brownsville than in Bay Ridge.
This incidence of crime means that innocent black men have a much higher chance than innocent white men of being stopped by the police because they match the description of a suspect. This is not something the police choose. It is a reality..." The Danger of the “Black Lives Matter” Movement
BTW....Brownsville has a population about 20% less than Bay Ridge....but 'the per capita shooting rate is 81 times higher than in nearby Bay Ridge, Brooklyn'
You still refuse to acknowledge that inconvenient fact.
Nope, there is no reasonable suspicion above. It applies to all people and reasonable suspicion does not mean that a cop can stop and search you simply because of who you are without any evidence of a crime. You essentially just said that being black is enough evidence to warrant a search. That is not just asinine but it is a big government position that would give the state the ability to completely disregard your rights at virtually any time.Any 'reasonable suspicion' in the above?
"The geographic disparities are also huge. In Brownsville, Brooklyn, the per capita shooting rate is 81 times higher than in nearby Bay Ridge, Brooklyn—the first neighborhood predominantly black, the second neighborhood predominantly white and Asian. As a result, police presence and use of proactive tactics are much higher in Brownsville than in Bay Ridge.
This incidence of crime means that innocent black men have a much higher chance than innocent white men of being stopped by the police because they match the description of a suspect. This is not something the police choose. It is a reality..." The Danger of the “Black Lives Matter” Movement
BTW....Brownsville has a population about 20% less than Bay Ridge....but 'the per capita shooting rate is 81 times higher than in nearby Bay Ridge, Brooklyn'"
Yet...your response is "there is no reasonable suspicion above."
There Are None So Blind
As Those Who Will Not See
Would you care to try again?
You are denying the most successful regimen against the criminal population that preys on their own folks, and the ability of trained police to make the sort of judgments that enable said regimen.
That's absurd.
What I am denying is the state the right to ignore the constitution. It is saddening to me to see so many 'conservatives' that claim to uphold the constitution ignore it just like the left does. The only real difference between the right and the left is what particular parts of the constitution they wish to ignore. They all lead to government largess and the abolition of rights in the end though.
Except that you are in serious error.
It has been adjudicated and found that stops are legal.
Hand-wringing over the shooting is absurd as a solution.