****OFFICAL**** Trump Hillary Debate 2016.09.26 Thread****

[Angushjalmur]

Stop and frisk was wildly successful and should be reinstated nation wide.

[AzzarTheGod]

Originally Posted by Angushjalmur [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Stop and frisk was wildly successful and should be reinstated nation wide.

There is no good reason for it not to be.

What do you have to hide? If you aren't breaking the law, whats the fucking problem?

Making sure everything among the jobless and destitute, who are at a high risk of violent crime,

Making sure they are staying on the up-and-up and staying on the straight and narrow, is bad policy now?

[Pokesan]

the real problem is not enough female police performing the searches

[Jarnauga]

Originally Posted by AzzarTheGod [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There is no good reason for it not to be.

(((the constitution))) ..?

[barrettdc1]

Originally Posted by Jarnauga [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

(((the constitution))) ..?

Seriously, ATG what the fuck?

Why don't we just chip everyone like dogs and let the gubment track us more than they already do? Ya know, CUZ IF U DON'T GOT NUTHIN 2 HIDE LOL.

The fuck outta here with that bullshit.

[entruil]

Originally Posted by Csihar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

1) Individual displaying suspicious is investigated


If it's about frisking people who are already being investigated then alright. The name is pretty odd then though. 'Stop and frisk'

I might be off on a tangent confusing exactly what you bring up, and I think you answered it yourself to an extent in that post.

It's the displaying suspicious behavior that muddies the water to me...

-----------
Azzar, the if you haven't done anything wrong argument can be used for a lot of things...

well if you aint done nuthin let us put metal detectors where you leave your property, cameras in your house,checkpoints and automated searches, random raids,self incrimination

the constitution is specifically made to restrain the Government from these types of things...


I know I live in my own bubble... I don't mind learning...

Most important though is probably to learn your state's version of

New York Civil Liberties Union - What To Do If You're Stopped By The Police




here's another link from that site about 'Stop and Frisk'

New York Civil Liberties Union - Stop and Frisk Campaign: About the Issue it is a parent link of the one above...

I don't like how it's framed as a racial issue but I can understand why it would be, some interesting links there imo.


I shouldn't even really be posting about it so i'll leave it alone now...

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by Csihar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Okay but then it's:

1) Individual displaying suspicious is investigated
2) Officer is justified in believing this person may be armed
3) Person is frisked

Right?

I can't seem to get a straight answer to the my question. Was stop and frisk the act of RANDOMLY selecting people? Or was it simply the act of frisking someone who was already being engaged? It sounded random to me, which wouldn't be covered by what that text described.

If it's about frisking people who are already being investigated then alright. The name is pretty odd then though. 'Stop and frisk'

Well that's why I put the old lady pic in there, flashing the gang sign while brandishing a firearm. Personally I thought it was down right hilarious, which would be the correct response while understanding the issue. But I picked up on your question from the get go, what you were leading to.

There is no "straight answer" like you are looking for, not unless it's explainable to a robot (literally meaning - not calling you a robot). This is an answer for the human equation, and why we just cant have robots patrolling the streets. May as well just fly armed autonomous drones (and they probably will very soon) if you lawyer it up to an algorithm understandable by crude robots, which it can't be understood by them and work properly.

Haven't you ever ...felt... the outcome of a situation? Whatever you want to call it, a premonition? Whatever. Robots can't do that, only people can. Cops on the streets can develop that pretty well, they call it gut feeling. Better to listen to it and be wrong than to not listen to it and be dead. At least if wrong, nobody is dead. If a robot is wrong, and they can't do gut feelings, then they just break after the attack.

So no, I refuse to lawyer cops into becoming robots, then say "see they are not good robots" and then demand robots to be put on the street. Because that's what it leads to.

The 1968 supreme court had it right, it is fully applicable to this case of stop and frisk. Considering the huge amount of cases they get every year compared to the very very few rulings they have time for (less than 1%), it's a waste of their time to go back and commentary it down to lawyer it up and then probably go back to the courts again at a future date to commentary it down again.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Makes sense now?

[Ahldagor]

THE FOURTH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION.

[entruil]

Originally Posted by Ahldagor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

THE FOURTH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION.

yea sry ahld... I thought it was my patriotic duty to ignore the constitution... /facepalm

really though yea u are absolutely right

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth...s_Constitution

[Sirken]

with a good enough lawyer, it doesn't matter what they find on you because it will be thrown out. don't give them any other reasons to hold you (obstruction of justice, resisting arrest, etc), and as long as they had no legal reason to search you, they cant use anything they find on you against you in court.

themoreyouknow.gif