It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: Hefficide
He should have allowed them to search him and told them why he was there. I would say to anyone don't mess with the police.
originally posted by: Bone75
a reply to: Hefficide
So is your issue with this the fact that a computer analysis identified this area as a "crime hot spot" rather than a conventional human analysis?
That's quite a leap to Minority Report type technology if you ask me.
originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: Hefficide
This incident you are using as an example is not actually fully associated with the pre crime computer prediction. The computer has, based on statistics, identified a hotspot, so the police have maintained a presence there. The guy's attitude is what got him into trouble. He should have allowed them to search him and told them why he was there. I would say to anyone don't mess with the police. Be polite and forthcoming from the word go. It is pointless to challenge and is the first step of escalation into an incident that could end up like this or even worse.
I think you have been a little imaginative here and making it fit your theories like a square peg in a round hole. You are using hype and exaggeration to make a point. The computer only reported statistics. This allows the police to focus their resources better. It is not predicting crime, just informing about problem areas.
originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Bone75
No.
My issues with this case and the ideas behind it are numerous.
The young man was stopped based upon correlated data that had nothing to do with him personally. At all.
That the notions of presumption of innocence, a need for probable cause both were absolutely absent from the pretense used to harass, violently beat and arrest this young man. Simply because he was physically in a location that the cops were power tripping about.
That numerous Constitutional protections were ignored. Including, but not limited to, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments as well as - in a very direct manner - Article Iv, Section 2, Clause 1 as it has been historically and staunchly stated by the SCOTUS and Congress.
That this sort of pretense has no discernible boundaries and could be used to justify nearly any violation of ones Rights.