RogerKint
RogerKint
  • Threads: 15
  • Posts: 1916
Joined: Dec 5, 2011
April 24th, 2014 at 12:16:21 AM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Some people(especially gamblers) have A lot of cash on them. I don't know what the laws are about that, but I have heard horror stories.



That, and the op says his kids are searched too often. With all due respect, you'd get serious too, Dan.

...so this is what DT is like.
100% risk of ruin
onenickelmiracle
onenickelmiracle
  • Threads: 212
  • Posts: 8277
Joined: Jan 26, 2012
April 24th, 2014 at 12:22:50 AM permalink
Quote: RogerKint



...so this is what DT is like.

No, all the crazies stay here.
I am a robot.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 12:27:35 AM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Some people(especially gamblers) have A lot of cash on them. I don't know what the laws are about that, but I have heard horror stories.



I can understand that, along with some cops not being on the level, (as well as some criminals masquerading in uniform), but you plan your route and carry bank drafts instead of C-notes. The casinos and their parking lots during WSOP are full of cash-laden players, and one stick up is a $20,000 loss. I've heard one dealer on break say, "If I weren't in my right mind, I'd be in the Palms parking lot with a piece and try for a score during the match, - I'm tired of dealing."

He was half-serious about it, almost three-quarters serious. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. He was shaking his head thinking about it....VERY unsettling. The money carried in Vegas during some events is nuts.

I know you can't always do that, but if you're carrying "a briefcase" or some bundles, you've planned your route, you carry a piece, and you're with comrades. If cops show up, (real or false), it isn't by accident then.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
April 24th, 2014 at 12:43:53 AM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

I can understand that, along with some cops not being on the level, (as well as some criminals masquerading in uniform), but you plan your route and carry bank drafts instead of C-notes. The casinos and their parking lots during WSOP are full of cash-laden players, and one stick up is a $20,000 loss. I've heard one dealer on break say, "If I weren't in my right mind, I'd be in the Palms parking lot with a piece and try for a score during the match, - I'm tired of dealing."

He was half-serious about it, almost three-quarters serious. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. He was shaking his head thinking about it....VERY unsettling. The money carried in Vegas during some events is nuts.

I know you can't always do that, but if you're carrying "a briefcase" or some bundles, you've planned your route, you carry a piece, and you're with comrades. If cops show up, (real or false), it isn't by accident then.

AP's just cant plan their route. You never know what you will find, where you will find it or how much money you will need.
I'm not talking about long trips, I'm talking about local casino hopping. AP's need cash, it's just the way it is. I had A cop yell at me for having $1700 in my wallet when he pulled me over at the Jones college library, claiming I should not have that much on me in that area(WTF). Imagine if I just had a good run on something.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 12:58:37 AM permalink
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN5W4tgZrcc

Dan - watch this

The issue is racial profiling results in multiple stops for doing nothing that is illegal to the point where it is disrupting to your life.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 1:01:02 AM permalink
I know that happens too, and it is God-awful wrong.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 1:01:03 AM permalink
[duplicate] But it was worth repeating: God-awful wrong.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 1:12:44 AM permalink
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtNvxZ9yCcI

This one is pretty bad although this is not profiling as much as cops gone bad.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Hunterhill
Hunterhill
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 2145
Joined: Aug 1, 2011
April 24th, 2014 at 4:19:34 AM permalink
Paigowdan you keep saying accept your speeding ticket and move on. That's the thing, in many of these instances there is no speeding. The cops are profiling and looking for money to steal with asset forfeiture laws.I used to think if you have nothing to hide, you will have no problem. This is very far from reality. If you are black or Hispanic looking and you travel alot, it's ALMOST a guarantee you will be stopped in some states.
The mountain is tall but grass grows on top of the mountain.
SanchoPanza
SanchoPanza
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 3502
Joined: May 10, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 5:21:46 AM permalink
Quote: FleaStiff

Cops look for things that are "out of place" so alot does depend on race and neighborhood. You've all heard of Driving While Black or Walking While Black. And merchants looking out for shoplifters tend to focus on black youths the most. You can throw the word statistics around all you want, but if you watch the Blacks the most, of course you catch alot of black shoplifters.

That is correct in many ways. During one of our prolonged strikes, I resorted to driving a cab in New York and had a fare involved in transporting, shall we say, questionable materials to one of the most dangerous corners in the city. She had checked first to see whether I was all right with that, explaining how much time would be involved waiting, etc.

When she left the bar and grill after her 10 minutes, she asked whether everything was all right. I responded, "Sure, there were two or three rotating patrol cars on the opposite corner the whole time." She said that was not because they were protecting the white guy, but rather because the only white guys in that area were into trafficking.
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 5:35:54 AM permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
Face
Administrator
Face
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 4448
Joined: Dec 27, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 5:55:10 AM permalink
Rule 6, Dan. #6. Keep it PG. No pornographic or violent images or text. Profanity is prohibited, especially the F word. (Amended 2/23/14 to not allow profanity at all. The previous policy was more lenient.)

If "sh*t" or "d*ck" is in the Bible, I retract my warning. But if they're not, clean it up.

On topic, the thought that one should forfeit their rights, and that not forfeiting should somehow mean you're free to receive a beat down courtesy of the men in blue, might just be more abhorrent an idea than the recent thread about liability.

I'll forget NYC for now, as it is no more than a cesspool of authoritarianism that's ruining the rest of the state. But most of the rest of the US of A is free. I don't care who you are or what you're doing, you have rights. Just about every single one of my good friends are LEO's in one form or another, from local all the way to Federal and all levels in between. But darkoz's story of winning a lawsuit pleases me indeed, and I can only hope his daughter prevails in the next two.

The 5-0 aren't the ones with rights, you are. About the only time you're required to provide ID is when stopped in a car, as the very act of driving requires having a license. Ain't no license for walking or strolling or sitting on the park bench. I carry everywhere, in a very unfriendly state. I only have full sized pistols, and as such, I index way too much. But so what? If someone notices my gun and calls 5-0 and they think they're gonna hassle me and demand stuff from me, they're in for a surprise.

There is something to be said for cooperation. Despite my demand to maintain my own personal rights, I have often let LEO's overstep their bounds and I've cooperated with them. It's a feel thing. I can get why they are the way they are sometimes. Being friends with so many, I know the horrors they go through, the horrors they may just have left before running into me. I suppose I can kind of sense whether it's just a fish for safety or if it's harassment. But where rights are concerned, that badge means nothing to me. If you're a little sketchy because it's late at night and cross that line for peace of mind, I'll give you peace of mind. But if you want to toss power around like you're above the law, we'll see who comes out on top.

Refusing ID, refusing detention, video taping any and all interactions, all of these are perfectly legal. I don't care if you can "tell" I have a pistol on my person. You have no right to stop me, hassle me, or require me to hand it over. But feel free to try. I need a new truck.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
chickenman
chickenman
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 997
Joined: Nov 1, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 6:04:27 AM permalink
Hunterhill
Hunterhill
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 2145
Joined: Aug 1, 2011
April 24th, 2014 at 6:06:39 AM permalink
+1.......
The mountain is tall but grass grows on top of the mountain.
Tanko
Tanko
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1195
Joined: Apr 22, 2013
April 24th, 2014 at 6:19:32 AM permalink
NYC and Chicago share the same demographic profile and the same Police to civilian ratio.

The overall crime rate in Chicago is higher than in NYC and the Chicago murder rate is many times higher.

Chicago had 43 murders per 100,000 residents in 2013.

NYC had 4 murders per 100,000 residents in 2013.

Time Article

Despite a population of more than eight million people and 53 million tourists annually, there were only 333 murders in NYC in 2013.

NYC is the safest large city in the USA.

The difference has been the Stop and Frisk policy.

NYC Police are proactive and Chicago Police are reactive.

This has resulted in an 85% drop in the NYC murder rate and a 65% reduction in overall crime since its peak before Mayor Guiliani.

Consequently, business investment and tourism in NYC has grown substantially and boosted the economy.

In the summer of 1989, forty-eight infants and toddlers were killed by stray gunfire in NYC

The effect of Stop and Frisk has been the saving of thousands of lives over they years.

Another benefit has been a reduction in the number of arrests.

People are less likely to commit a crime when their chance of getting caught is higher.

People are less likely to shoot someone after a Police Officer takes their gun during Stop and Frisk.

People are less likely to carry a gun to use in a crime knowing they can be stopped and frisked.

70-75% of violent crimes in NYC are committed by African Americans.

Only 53% of those stopped and frisked are African American.

Kelly

So, the number of African Americans subjected to Stop and Frisk is disproportionately low.

A lot of people, especially young ones, are alive today because of Stop and Frisk.

In response to one teenager who complained, Commissioner Kelly replied, "We are trying to save his life and the lives of other young people who are disproportionately victimized".
treetopbuddy
treetopbuddy
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1739
Joined: Jan 12, 2013
April 24th, 2014 at 6:55:09 AM permalink
Quote: rudeboyoi

You believing that stop and frisk is a good policy is what's wrong with today's society. Its clearly in direct violation of the 4th amendment but its "okay" because it makes the city a "safer" place.



Your right,.....The end justifies the means....."stop and frisk" is wrong on so many levels. I'd love to know what percentage of the money stolen by LE makes it to evidence storage.

LE is infested with mean spirited adrenalin junkies

Remember "shelter in place"....unless you make the donuts
Each day is better than the next
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 7:55:49 AM permalink
Quote: Tanko

Only 53% of those stopped and frisked are African American.

Kelly

So, the number of African Americans subjected to Stop and Frisk is disproportionately low.




Here is from the website you are quoting. Lets make certain ALL the facts are presented. Below is clear cut racial profiling.

•In 2011, there were 685,724 stops and frisks -- up from 160,851 in 2003.
•In 2001, 53% of those stopped and frisked were African Americans. Latinos made up 32% of stops and frisks, and whites accounted for 9%.
•In 2011, 89% of those stops and frisks happened to citizens who weren't guilty of any crime.


So by these statistics, black and latinos are predominantly stopped AND mostly innocent civilians. If 89% are not guilty upon stop and frisk, then the program has only been successful in catching 11% of the total people stopped as criminals.

Hardly a successful program and certainly NOT the reason crime has dropped significantly in NYC.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 8:00:37 AM permalink
"Despite the police claims that the stops keep criminals and weapons off the streets, only about 6 percent of stops lead to arrests, and last year, only one in every 879 stops turned up a gun."

Quoted from this article in the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/opinion/stop-and-frisk-in-new-york-city.html?_r=0
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
  • Threads: 121
  • Posts: 10942
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 8:21:27 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

"Despite the police claims that the stops keep criminals and weapons off the streets, only about 6 percent of stops lead to arrests, and last year, only one in every 879 stops turned up a gun."

Quoted from this article in the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/opinion/stop-and-frisk-in-new-york-city.html?_r=0



I'd say 6% is a HUGE success. I'd like the cops to do an additional 879 if that's another illegal gun they can get off the streets.

That being said, I have a black friend I play basketball with, with two pre-teen children. We were chatting after basketball a few weeks back, and I asked him about Obama, racism, and other such topics and how it affected him. He said he is preparing to give his son 'the talk' soon. 'The talk' to him was how you respond to over-zealous white authority figures, and the proper way to not get in trouble even if you were not doing anything that should get you into trouble.
It's really a tough job the cops have.... Those who state that individual freedoms are sometimes trampled on are of course correct.... Those that state that there are fewer murders, assaults, etc... are also correct. As someone who just took care of a young black man stabbed in the heart, I can assure you his family would have been ok with a "hunch' search of his assailant before the assault.
rudeboyoi
rudeboyoi
  • Threads: 27
  • Posts: 2001
Joined: Mar 28, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 8:41:28 AM permalink
You can never entrust a man to have power over another. Power will always corrupt.

In the state of AZ, from 1917 to 1997 there were 90,000 convicted felons. From 1997 to 2010, there were 200,000 more convicted felons. Each day you're locked up in the state of AZ, they get $100 from the federal government. By keeping costs minimal, they have created a profitable business venture out of ruining other peoples lives.
Face
Administrator
Face
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 4448
Joined: Dec 27, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 8:47:04 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

I'd say 6% is a HUGE success. I'd like the cops to do an additional 879 if that's another illegal gun they can get off the streets.

That being said, I have a black friend I play basketball with, with two pre-teen children. We were chatting after basketball a few weeks back, and I asked him about Obama, racism, and other such topics and how it affected him. He said he is preparing to give his son 'the talk' soon. 'The talk' to him was how you respond to over-zealous white authority figures, and the proper way to not get in trouble even if you were not doing anything that should get you into trouble.
It's really a tough job the cops have.... Those who state that individual freedoms are sometimes trampled on are of course correct.... Those that state that there are fewer murders, assaults, etc... are also correct. As someone who just took care of a young black man stabbed in the heart, I can assure you his family would have been ok with a "hunch' search of his assailant before the assault.



I can't agree. I feel it's this same thing that's bleaching the colors of our flag.

One stabbing is of course bad. To the family, the victim, tragic. But to the 879 victims of abuse, privacy invasion, assault... is that a tab that's theirs to pay?

It's just another side of this scourge of "perceived safety by any means". It's this very thing that's robbing America of the only thing that ever mattered - freedom. A nick here, a cut there; our country is dying the death of a thousand paper cuts.

I dunno. I prefer freedom.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
April 24th, 2014 at 9:09:17 AM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

say "Yes, I was speeding"



lol. Worst advice ever. Never, ever admit to anything. Anything you say to the cop can be used against you when you fight the ticket. You are best not to answer any questions related to what you were doing.
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 9:11:13 AM permalink
6% is a horrible failure. It means they are looking in the wrong places.

Certainly the police should have a better success rate than 6% in solving crimes. Perhaps if they looked at people committing crimes instead of innocent people walking down the street they would have a better success rate.

It means they are not looking at people who are truly suspicious because of their actions but their skin color or neighborhood.

It means they got lucky!

Its like stating a 6% win rate at a -ev game is successful because simply by playing you got lucky a few times.

Our country is supposed to uphold the credo of allowing the guilty leeway if it avoids putting an innocent in harms way.

By your logic, if 879 innocent people go to jail for crimes they didn't commit, that would be good as long as it resulted in one guilty criminal being convicted.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
April 24th, 2014 at 9:12:08 AM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

I don't get it.

When getting pulled over by a trooper, where to be - or acting courteous - like Tommy Lee Jones on a sunny day, is a good solution.
If you're clean, then be courteous and present id, and take your speeding ticket, and high tail it out of there. It's simple.
If dirty, be courteous, and reject what you can.

Why so serious.



No one ever said that you shouldn't be courteous. You can be courteous, and, at the same time, refuse things that violate your rights. If an officer asks if he can search your vehicle, you can politely say no.
Buzzard
Buzzard
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
April 24th, 2014 at 9:31:46 AM permalink
When you say no thanks to a search, be preparing to wait for the dog to show up or be told to follow the officer to the dog. If he asked in the first place, then you saying no is further proof that you are guilty until proven innocent. And of course you will be compensated for time lost from work, mileage , etc.

And if you think a cop can not stop any vehicle he wants to, you have never been stopped for a DWB !
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
  • Threads: 121
  • Posts: 10942
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 9:45:28 AM permalink
Quote: Face



One stabbing is of course bad. To the family, the victim, tragic. But to the 879 victims of abuse, privacy invasion, assault... is that a tab that's theirs to pay?

.



Yes, it is. We allow ourselves to be searched when we fly, and I'll guess they find a terrorist maybe once out of 100,000,000 searches, let alone once out of 879. I go to speak with our representatives in Albany and I always get searched. Same in Washington. To exercise my right to be heard I must consent to be searched. I believe that by living in a civilized society I do give up freedoms for the overall good.
If there is an assault there are laws against that.
This is obviously not a black and white discussion.
I'll give a somewhat silly example..... There is a man a few feet outside of a kindergarten playground using a Samurai Sword to hack off the heads of papier-mâché children. You don't want the police to 'infringe' on his rights? Assuming he has made no threat to any real child.... I still want the cops involved...
RS
RS
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8626
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
April 24th, 2014 at 9:54:06 AM permalink
Quote: rudeboyoi

Not surprised that Dan once again has the wrong mindset. No one should have any more power over another. That is not freedom.



This
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 10:08:44 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

Yes, it is. We allow ourselves to be searched when we fly, and I'll guess they find a terrorist maybe once out of 100,000,000 searches, let alone once out of 879. I go to speak with our representatives in Albany and I always get searched. Same in Washington. To exercise my right to be heard I must consent to be searched. I believe that by living in a civilized society I do give up freedoms for the overall good.
If there is an assault there are laws against that.
This is obviously not a black and white discussion.
I'll give a somewhat silly example..... There is a man a few feet outside of a kindergarten playground using a Samurai Sword to hack off the heads of papier-mâché children. You don't want the police to 'infringe' on his rights? Assuming he has made no threat to any real child.... I still want the cops involved...



Soopoo, you are giving up the wrong freedoms or you don't understand the law.

The law protects people and their respective property. When you enter a nightclub and they require a frisk or to search your bags that is their property you are entering so they have that right if you want to enter. You must follow their rules.

Ditto for airports or government buildings.

BUT your property, your home, your car, your pockets are yours and cannot be searched on a whim just because.

The airport security guard does not have the right to ask you to be searched when you enter your own house nor does the police officer (without a warrant that he has obtained based on evidence presented to a judge)
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Face
Administrator
Face
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 4448
Joined: Dec 27, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 10:09:10 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

Yes, it is. We allow ourselves to be searched when we fly, and I'll guess they find a terrorist maybe once out of 100,000,000 searches, let alone once out of 879. I go to speak with our representatives in Albany and I always get searched. Same in Washington. To exercise my right to be heard I must consent to be searched. I believe that by living in a civilized society I do give up freedoms for the overall good.
If there is an assault there are laws against that.
This is obviously not a black and white discussion.
I'll give a somewhat silly example..... There is a man a few feet outside of a kindergarten playground using a Samurai Sword to hack off the heads of papier-mâché children. You don't want the police to 'infringe' on his rights? Assuming he has made no threat to any real child.... I still want the cops involved...



Well, you've certainly picked to correct state in which to live =)

But don't get me started on all these other searches. Some kid just stowawayed on a jet from Ca. to Ha. Hopped a fence and crawled into the landing gear. I don't care that the TSA gets to see my junk, but don't tell me it's for "safety". And Federal buildings? Why is the mailman's life more precious than mine? Why does a bank teller get federally enforced "protection" that Dr. SOOPOO does not receive?

From Wiki - "Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement; that is, rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people, according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory."

They are OURS. Not "sometimes" or "depending on" or "in exchange for". Why should you be forced to forfeit your 4th so you can exercise your 1st? By doing so, it is no longer a "right". Do it enough, and it no longer will be.

And to the upcoming comments that I'm gonna turn into one of those weird guys that live in the woods - I know. And I can't wait =p
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 10:22:10 AM permalink
Quote: Face

Well, you've certainly picked to correct state in which to live =)

But don't get me started on all these other searches. Some kid just stowawayed on a jet from Ca. to Ha. Hopped a fence and crawled into the landing gear. I don't care that the TSA gets to see my junk, but don't tell me it's for "safety". And Federal buildings? Why is the mailman's life more precious than mine? Why does a bank teller get federally enforced "protection" that Dr. SOOPOO does not receive?

From Wiki - "Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement; that is, rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people, according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory."

They are OURS. Not "sometimes" or "depending on" or "in exchange for". Why should you be forced to forfeit your 4th so you can exercise your 1st? By doing so, it is no longer a "right". Do it enough, and it no longer will be.

And to the upcoming comments that I'm gonna turn into one of those weird guys that live in the woods - I know. And I can't wait =p



The FACE of reason
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 10:29:07 AM permalink
Quote: Face

Rule 6, Dan. #6. Keep it PG. No pornographic or violent images or text. Profanity is prohibited, especially the F word. (Amended 2/23/14 to not allow profanity at all. The previous policy was more lenient.)

If "sh*t" or "d*ck" is in the Bible, I retract my warning. But if they're not, clean it up.


Got it, apologies. The subject of cops alone can produce some emotional steam.

Quote: Face

On topic, the thought that one should forfeit their rights, and that not forfeiting should somehow mean you're free to receive a beat down courtesy of the men in blue, might just be more abhorrent an idea than the recent thread about liability.

I'll forget NYC for now, as it is no more than a cesspool of authoritarianism that's ruining the rest of the state. But most of the rest of the US of A is free. I don't care who you are or what you're doing, you have rights. Just about every single one of my good friends are LEO's in one form or another, from local all the way to Federal and all levels in between. But darkoz's story of winning a lawsuit pleases me indeed, and I can only hope his daughter prevails in the next two.

The 5-0 aren't the ones with rights, you are. About the only time you're required to provide ID is when stopped in a car, as the very act of driving requires having a license. Ain't no license for walking or strolling or sitting on the park bench. I carry everywhere, in a very unfriendly state. I only have full sized pistols, and as such, I index way too much. But so what? If someone notices my gun and calls 5-0 and they think they're gonna hassle me and demand stuff from me, they're in for a surprise.

There is something to be said for cooperation. Despite my demand to maintain my own personal rights, I have often let LEO's overstep their bounds and I've cooperated with them. It's a feel thing. I can get why they are the way they are sometimes. Being friends with so many, I know the horrors they go through, the horrors they may just have left before running into me. I suppose I can kind of sense whether it's just a fish for safety or if it's harassment. But where rights are concerned, that badge means nothing to me. If you're a little sketchy because it's late at night and cross that line for peace of mind, I'll give you peace of mind. But if you want to toss power around like you're above the law, we'll see who comes out on top.


With Law enforcement officers, cooperation with no sense of personal insult is hard, but it's practicality is absolutely without question.

Quote: Face

Refusing ID, refusing detention, video taping any and all interactions, all of these are perfectly legal. I don't care if you can "tell" I have a pistol on my person. You have no right to stop me, hassle me, or require me to hand it over. But feel free to try. I need a new truck.


Yes, it is legal to refuse ID, etc., but so is showing ID when asked. What's a legal action and a wise action can be two different things, as well as the same action. I KNOW people may have issues with cops, but if it's concerning some questioning or showing ID, then why cop an attitude (no pun intended), or in any way antagonize a law officer? I Know cops can have attitude and posture, but I focus on my bearing and peace of mind and get it done with safely. In thinking about what's best for me in such a situation with a cop, it's about how my actions can help my situation, and in a sense, "refusing to be or act paranoid" for my sake, MY benefit.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
  • Threads: 121
  • Posts: 10942
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 11:05:26 AM permalink
DarkOz, Face--- please respond to my Samurai sword situation. A man on public land, the street outside of a school playground, doing nothing illegal.

And Dark, I understand the law, I just live in the real world, where my life is better because the cops might bend it....... You are correct on theoretical grounds, I see dead people every day at work who your theories didn't work for.....
rainman
rainman
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 1860
Joined: Mar 28, 2012
April 24th, 2014 at 11:33:17 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

DarkOz, Face--- please respond to my Samurai sword situation. A man on public land, the street outside of a school playground, doing nothing illegal.

And Dark, I understand the law, I just live in the real world, where my life is better because the cops might bend it....... You are correct on theoretical grounds, I see dead people every day at work who your theories didn't work for.....



I think the sword swingers actions would be deemed out of the ordinary for any reasonably sane human.
The police would certainly have legal grounds to make contact and perhaps take him in for a psych.
evaluation.
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 11:48:13 AM permalink
Quote: rainman

I think the sword swingers actions would be deemed out of the ordinary for any reasonably sane human.
The police would certainly have legal grounds to make contact and perhaps take him in for a psych.
evaluation.



Rain Man pretty much answered that.

And clearly the issue is not whether someone should be stopped for breaking the law or doing something legal BUT whether they should be stopped based on suspicion.

A man wielding a samurai sword chopping off heads of child mannequins in the middle of any city street much less outside a school is suspicious.

Walking down the street dressed in regular clothes on your way to work or a party is not.

Sorry, your example for why you were right didn't pass the mustard
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Face
Administrator
Face
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 4448
Joined: Dec 27, 2010
April 24th, 2014 at 2:49:58 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz

The FACE of reason



Thanks =)

Quote: Paigowdan

Got it, apologies. The subject of cops alone can produce some emotional steam.



Totally understand. I often have to check and rewrite several times ;)

And I agree with you on cooperation, to a point. Like I said, I've often allowed them to overstep bounds, as giving them peace of mind and acquiring an easier time for myself was more EV than fighting the power. I'm just saying you don't have to bend to every whim. In fact, you don't have to bend to most whims. And due to the ever increasing instances of lawful gun carriers finding themselves face down on the road or lawful, cash-only folks finding their stash confiscated, it's good to know what your rights are.

Quote: SOOPOO

DarkOz, Face--- please respond to my Samurai sword situation. A man on public land, the street outside of a school playground, doing nothing illegal.



Reasonable Articulatable Suspicion. It's what everything hinges on. In your silly example, a man has a weapon and is using it in public. Surely the use of any weapon in public can be questioned. A cop has full right to question. It's what happens next that's the issue. Provided the man is not in a state that forbids those types of weapons, he is not subject to search or detainment and has done nothing wrong. But assuming he's on public property, the officer can tell him to leave.

In that circumstance, nothing happens. If the loon wanted to cry harassment, the officer can reasonably articulate his reason for approaching. It is neither an infringement of rights or a violation of the law to ask a question. If the loon refused to leave, then it's trespass and he can be arrested. If the cop demands him to empty his pockets and hand over the sword, that's a violation of the 4th (among possibly other laws).

If the outline of my gun shows through my gym shorts, any 5-0 is free to approach me and ask questions. Me being me and living in a small town where everyone knows everyone and I'm friends with their brothers in blue, I'd probably produce my permit, just to let him know "hey, I respect you and I'm cool". But that's where that ends. Why I'm carrying, what I'm carrying, where I'm going, that's none of their business. I am walking away, and there's not a thing they can do about it.
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
petroglyph
petroglyph
  • Threads: 19
  • Posts: 3360
Joined: Jan 3, 2013
April 24th, 2014 at 3:51:50 PM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

obviously not a black and white discussion.
I'll give a somewhat silly example..... There is a man a few feet outside of a kindergarten playground using a Samurai Sword to hack off the heads of papier-mâché children. You don't want the police to 'infringe' on his rights? Assuming he has made no threat to any real child.... I still want the cops involved...




As you mentioned, not black and white.

The example of the swordsman and the paper mache children. This example probably takes place every day near Riyadh, Saudi Arabia outside the local madrassa?

So in this case the lunatic with the sword gets respect. It's the woman who gets slapped around. Weird hunh
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 24th, 2014 at 10:28:14 PM permalink
It was several years ago so I had forgotten about it but the samurai sword example brought it to mind.

My son was about thirteen and he and his friends were headed to the park with baseball bats for a game. They had their mitts and were dressed in their baseball outfits. They were scheduled to play a game at the park but this was the hood.

The police saw them walking as a group and confiscated their bats as weapons. They objected but to no avail. They lost the game by default and had to have their parents come down one by one and get the bats from the station.

This is the same neighborhood my daughter currently lives in where the cops harrass with unwarranted stops. Fifteen or twenty years and still the same pattern of authority abuse.

And yeah, the team was almost all black teenagers. It was in the hood after all. But they were good kids on their way to a game
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
teddys
teddys
  • Threads: 150
  • Posts: 5527
Joined: Nov 14, 2009
April 25th, 2014 at 1:10:27 AM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

Quote: RogerKint

I can always tell when Im about to be searched. It's "where are you going, where are you coming from, you seem nervous, step out of the car". When I'm gettin a traffic warning or ticket it's "license and registration please". Interestingly, when I'm frisked and car is searched, I don't receive a ticket for the supposed infraction for which I was pulled over. When they find nothing, they leave as fast as they came, which is nice... except for the rapey feeling afterwards.

Axiom, I wish I had your balls in refusing to be searched. When I'm confronted by a man with his hand on his gun I can't think straight.



Really? No you don't.

Don't have a Rosa Parks, Mahatma Gandhi, or Sojourner Truth kind of "truth to power" episode thing over this when being pulled over by a freaking highway trooper. I understand this entire "My American constipational rights, Gaddamit, - now let me show this dickhead cop the LAW" kind of thing, but you'll be proving nothing but being a resistant-to-arrest clown on a police video tape that'll be shown in court.

Get pulled over by a local trooper with a hard-on somewhere in Farnsworthville, Alabama, don't get slick with the bastard. You HAVE no point to prove.

Just Fully Open your driver side window, keep your hands on the wheel, show him your driver's license and registration, and say "Yes, I was speeding" and be down with it with that. If he asks if "Sir, do you have any contraband on your vehicle," you say "no, sir, I don't," and consent to the search IF clean. If dirty, say "yes, I reject a vehicle search," and get SAFELY busted - and let YOUR LAWYER handle this shit.



NO! Absolutely not! PLAY the Eunuch and get home with no problem, and have your lawyer show his balls - You do NOT want to have "too many balls" or too much stupidity when you engage a heavily armed law officer when he pulls you over on a simple traffic stop, carrying or not.

You will want to be:
1. Cool,
2. Calm,
3. Courteous, and
4. composed for this situation.

You have nothing to prove except that you are an idiot and that your skull is crackable - if you give a state trooper a hard time for no good reason.

If you don't trust cops following the law, then all the more reason to find a safe exit for yourself.

You sue the police from your lawyer's office, and report to a reporter from the Los Angeles Times - from safe at home.

For a low-life criminal to be beaten by cops is bad enough. For a Hush-puppy crumb-cake Milquetoast citizen to deliberately entice an altercation with a cop as a personal exercise to assert his Constipational Rights is folly.

Poppycock. You can still be compliant with the officer and assert your constitutional rights. I don't consent to any searches without a warrant, clean or dirty. We are not living in China.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
  • Threads: 326
  • Posts: 9557
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
April 25th, 2014 at 3:58:54 AM permalink
>entice an altercation

assert your rights, but not this
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!”   She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
Tanko
Tanko
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1195
Joined: Apr 22, 2013
April 25th, 2014 at 4:59:08 AM permalink
Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Has this ever been challenged in a federal court?



It was upheld by the Supreme Court in Kelly vs. Ohio in 1968.

There is a link to it in this article: Bratton

Judge Sheindlin ruled that Police Officers sometimes carried out Stop and Frisk unconstitutiionally by discriminating against minorities.

Her decision did not direct an end to Stop and Frisk.

The new Mayor, who ran on an anti-Stop and Frisk platform has not ended the policy.

Near the end of his campaign, he changed his position from outright "anti" to "reforms".

Then he appointed Stop and Frisk advocate Bill Bratton, as Commissioner.
Tanko
Tanko
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1195
Joined: Apr 22, 2013
April 25th, 2014 at 5:11:50 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

"Despite the police claims that the stops keep criminals and weapons off the streets, only about 6 percent of stops lead to arrests, and last year, only one in every 879 stops turned up a gun."



Good!

That shows it's working.

The objective of Stop and Frisk is to prevent crime.

A 6% arrest rate is excellent.

The Police took 800 guns and 8,000 other weapons off the streets last year using Stop and Frisk.

How many lives were saved?

How many people were spared from grief?

How many crimes were prevented?

The number of stops has fallen 86% over the same period last year.

Gun and other weapon confiscations have fallen 50%.

Another bad sign is that arrests are up 16%.

Criminals are becoming more brazen due to the lower rate of stops.
gts4ever
gts4ever
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 115
Joined: Apr 2, 2013
April 25th, 2014 at 6:44:54 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

Hardly a successful program and certainly NOT the reason crime has dropped significantly in NYC.


If this is certainly not the reason, what are the other factors you feel are more significant?
Quote: darkoz

Here is from the website you are quoting. Lets make certain ALL the facts are presented. Below is clear cut racial profiling.
•In 2011, there were 685,724 stops and frisks -- up from 160,851 in 2003.
•In 2001, 53% of those stopped and frisked were African Americans. Latinos made up 32% of stops and frisks, and whites accounted for 9%.
•In 2011, 89% of those stops and frisks happened to citizens who weren't guilty of any crime.

So by these statistics, black and latinos are predominantly stopped AND mostly innocent civilians. If 89% are not guilty upon stop and frisk, then the program has only been successful in catching 11% of the total people stopped as criminals.



This mindset is pretty prevalent in regard to this topic. My issue with it is that it seems to me that two very separate arguments are being combined into one. The first issue is whether or not random searching of humans is effective in preventing the undesirable activity, simplified here into 'carrying firearms'. In this regard, I don't think you can point to a low % findings rate to demonstrate the theory is invalid, since the system is designed to lessen the likelihood one will carry a gun due to the risk of being randomly selected for a search. In some sense, a low % of stops resulting in arrest could be a byproduct of the program working. Hard to tease results like that out of the data though, compared to the possibility that the guns were never there to begin with.

The second issue is whether the "random" stops are disproportionally targeted to one of several minority categories. The question here is which set of proportions are we testing the bias against? Is is the ratio of minorities across the entire United States? In NYC? In the particular area being analyzed? Or are we testing the ratio of stops as compared to the historical ratios of crimes committed? If a particular area is 90% "minority" with 85% of past offenders being minorities, a Stop and Frisk program targeting a ratio of 75% minority/25% white would if anything indicate an unfounded bias towards stopping whites.

Just my two cents.
SanchoPanza
SanchoPanza
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 3502
Joined: May 10, 2010
April 25th, 2014 at 7:28:54 AM permalink
Quote: gts4ever

. . . whether the "random" stops are disproportionally targeted to one of several minority categories. The question here is which set of proportions are we testing the bias against? Is is the ratio of minorities across the entire United States? In NYC? In the particular area being analyzed? Or are we testing the ratio of stops as compared to the historical ratios of crimes committed?

Surely the 6 percent of "Other" listed by darkoz that is made up of Chinese, Arabs, Indians, Vietnamese, Koreans and so on is far, far smaller than their proportions of whichever populace you want to measure. Then again, maybe prison inmates should be proportional to their ethnic groups. And just who would be deciding what group hybrids would be placed in? Ah, the fertile field of ludicrous questions!
geoff
geoff
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 368
Joined: Feb 19, 2014
April 25th, 2014 at 7:36:20 AM permalink
If 80% of the crime is in a 6 block area then it makes sense to put your police presence there. If 80% of the people who live in that area are black/latino then it's not racial profiling when 80% of the stops are for them.
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 25th, 2014 at 7:44:10 AM permalink
Quote:


The second issue is whether the "random" stops are disproportionally targeted to one of several minority categories. The question here is which set of proportions are we testing the bias against? Is is the ratio of minorities across the entire United States? In NYC? In the particular area being analyzed? Or are we testing the ratio of stops as compared to the historical ratios of crimes committed? If a particular area is 90% "minority" with 85% of past offenders being minorities, a Stop and Frisk program targeting a ratio of 75% minority/25% white would if anything indicate an unfounded bias towards stopping whites.

Just my two cents.



http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/08/new_york_s_stop_and_frisk_policy_is_neither_effective_nor_constitutional.html

The article above pretty much sums up the arguments of the judge why it was both unconstitutional because it violated everyones right to not be stopped without suspicious cause and also why it was a racially biased program.

From the article:

In 52 percent of all stops, the person was black; in 31 percent, Hispanic; and in 10 percent, white (against a population made up of 23 percent black, 29 percent Hispanic, and 33 percent white).


Weapons were seized in 1.0 percent of the stops of blacks,
1.1 percent of the stops of Hispanics, and
1.4 percent of the stops of whites.

Contraband other than weapons was seized in 1.8 percent of the stops of blacks, 1.7 percent of the stops of Hispanics, and 2.3 percent of the stops of whites.

Hmm, less whites searched more whites found with weapons and contraband. Sounds like racial profiling to me.

And before you're next question/argument, these statistics were the self supplied statistics by the NYPD from their own reporting database supplied to the judge according to the article. She did the right thing when she saw those numbers
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Buzzard
Buzzard
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 6814
Joined: Oct 28, 2012
April 25th, 2014 at 3:46:22 PM permalink
" She did the right thing when she saw those numbers " Never trust a woman who wears a black robe at work.
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
April 26th, 2014 at 1:20:25 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/08/new_york_s_stop_and_frisk_policy_is_neither_effective_nor_constitutional.html

The article above pretty much sums up the arguments of the judge why it was both unconstitutional because it violated everyones right to not be stopped without suspicious cause and also why it was a racially biased program.

From the article:

In 52 percent of all stops, the person was black; in 31 percent, Hispanic; and in 10 percent, white (against a population made up of 23 percent black, 29 percent Hispanic, and 33 percent white).


Weapons were seized in 1.0 percent of the stops of blacks,
1.1 percent of the stops of Hispanics, and
1.4 percent of the stops of whites.

Contraband other than weapons was seized in 1.8 percent of the stops of blacks, 1.7 percent of the stops of Hispanics, and 2.3 percent of the stops of whites.

Hmm, less whites searched more whites found with weapons and contraband./q]

♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
April 26th, 2014 at 1:21:58 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/08/new_york_s_stop_and_frisk_policy_is_neither_effective_nor_constitutional.html

The article above pretty much sums up the arguments of the judge why it was both unconstitutional because it violated everyones right to not be stopped without suspicious cause and also why it was a racially biased program.

From the article:

In 52 percent of all stops, the person was black; in 31 percent, Hispanic; and in 10 percent, white (against a population made up of 23 percent black, 29 percent Hispanic, and 33 percent white).


Weapons were seized in 1.0 percent of the stops of blacks,
1.1 percent of the stops of Hispanics, and
1.4 percent of the stops of whites.

Contraband other than weapons was seized in 1.8 percent of the stops of blacks, 1.7 percent of the stops of Hispanics, and 2.3 percent of the stops of whites.

Hmm, less whites searched more whites found with weapons and contraband.

I have a feeling the whites the did stop and frisk probably looked more suspicious in the first place.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 296
  • Posts: 11419
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
April 26th, 2014 at 2:04:48 AM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

I have a feeling the whites they did stop and frisk probably looked more suspicious in the first place.



I agree totally, Axelwolf, those whites probably were doing something that looked suspicious.

Unfortunately, that is racial profiling.

Blacks look suspicious because they are black so they get stopped.

Whites look suspicious when they are actually observed doing something that the reasonable person would find suspicious.

In Soopoo's example,

The white guy swinging a samurai sword would be stopped and frisked.

While the black guy walking to work would be stopped and frisked.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
May 1st, 2014 at 5:01:33 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz



While the black guy walking to work .

Might sound suspicious to a racist in the first place.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
  • Jump to: