Trump urges Americans to give up the Constitution for Security

Hmmm , adopting Obama's policies of doing away with the Constitution ?
1) We know the evil corruption of a POS like Hilary Clinton
2) Donald Trump ?

People are ready to give up their constitutional rights just because he is not Hillary. She is not any better either.

We know what to expect from Hillary, 4 more years of Obama...still King O couldn't take away our Second. Trump really sounds like a bully, authoritarian who doesn't care about the law of the land. He sounds so evil , vicious and greedy that he won't mind sending us to die for Saudi cause because he can make few bucks on it.

May be it is all planned, first "they" installed O, but they couldn't influence populace, now they have their direct guy bypassing the middle man aka politicians. The corporations, business men, lobbyists who control political puppets from behind the scene are more evil than the middle man, we all know which category Trump belongs to..

originally posted by: RomeByFire
In before Hillary comments and attack on the source.

Trump supporters don't care, just as Hillary supporters don't care about her negatives.

They both represent things that don't represent the American populace.

Being lifelong friends, can't say I'm surprised.

Once again - Americans are plagued with the notion and (s)election between Democrats and Republicans that are both corrupt and do not represent we the people.

Wake up, folks - we're being played.

Just have to say bravo to you

Joke's on us.. can't say I'm laughing though.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: burdman30ott6

It's still not right.

I swear, I try to stay consistent when it comes to individual rights.

Will it make a big difference? Perhaps not.

But I find it difficult to ignore individual liberties. I really do. I understand how "stop and frisk" is effective.

But I just can't.

*Shakes head in frustration*

Stop and frisk is effective but it's procluded in a free society with free citizens.

Stop and frisk applies to those in prison - not in a free society with free citizens.

As far as I'm concerned, the fourth got it right. Unreasonable search and seizure is unreasonable.

Driving is another matter - but when it comes to stop and frisk, that's bull#.

No one should be under the pressure of having a complete stranger harass their persons for some #ed up sense of security that it may bring - especially a complete stranger with a weapon that statistically represent a demographic that kill more American citizens than those big bad uber secret super spy terrorist groups do.

a reply to: rnaa

Trump urges Americans to give up the Constitution for Security - How NMO is that?

The worst of it is that there will be plenty of sheeple out there who will think its a good idea. They may just be the sample on where are stupid enough to think 'updating the constitution' is a good idea.

Trump doesn't understand that Americans will never give up the Constitution in exchange for security!

People have to calm down about this.

Thread title is bogus anyway.

I'm sure he couldn't get it nationwide even if he wanted to. lol.

The Stop-question-and-frisk program, or stop-and-frisk, in New York City, is a practice of the New York City Police Department in which police officers stop and question a pedestrian, then frisk them for weapons and other contraband; this is what is known in other places in the United States as the Terry stop.

The rules for stop, question, and frisk are found in the state's criminal procedure law section 140.50, and are based on the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Terry v. Ohio.[1]

[2] About 684,000 people were stopped in 2011,[1][3][4] however the number of stops has been reduced dramatically since then, to 22,939 in 2015.[3] The vast majority of those stopped were African-American or Latino,[1][3][4] a disparity which, according to a 2007 study, persists even after controlling for "precinct variability and race-specific estimates of crime participation."[5]

So it seems there is something on the books already. The Terry Stop.

It's just a matter of police doing what they have to.

Like ICE and HLS and FBI etc.

Doesn't sound like it needs to be forever either, as a full press measure.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: rnaa

Another Stop-and-Frisk thread for today? Better get our copy/paste tools fired up, to say the same things in this thread that we posted in the other one. sigh...

Nice attack piece and it aims right at the heart of they type of people wanting to support Trump. That being he is no safe haven and he is just like the rest of the morally bankrupt politicians. This post suggests he will continue the police state march into a 1984 existence as the rest of the politico.

Then again just maybe he is throwing politically correct out and calling a spade a spade. Where does most of the crime come from is perhaps the thing being addressed. Maybe he is just saying lets see things for what they are and address them.

originally posted by: whyamIhere
a reply to: rnaa

How has being nice and understanding working for us ?

I love my rights...

The problem is others could care less about my rights.

Or Yours...

Yout got that right ...

originally posted by: whyamIhere
a reply to: rnaa

How has being nice and understanding working for us ?

I love my rights...

The problem is others could care less about my rights.

Or Yours...

What an absurd oversimplification!

When were we "nice and understanding" about anything?

The facts about Trump's core authoritarian values are becoming more clear by the day. He has made many statements that indicate his disdain for the Constitution and rule-of-law, but this garbage was a CONSIDERED POLICY STATEMENT.

He intends to blatantly trample the Constitution. Let's stop pretending and mincing words.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

They say the same about Hillary and can also never link proof of it.

He intends to blatantly trample the Constitution. Let's stop pretending and mincing words.

Let me know when he starts to assassinate American Citizens...

Let me know when he starts to argue he can assassinate Americans at home...

What you think he 'intends' to do, is nothing compared to what has been done.

Last night, NBC News' Michael Isikoff released a 16-page "white paper" prepared by the Obama DOJ that purports to justify Obama's power to target even Americans for assassination without due process

And you turn a blind eye to when it actually does happen... All because of Party affiliation. It gives the impression one doesn't really care about the constitution ; One cares about the Party...



This thread is poltical tripe, and hypocrisy.

a reply to: rnaa

Its stop, question and frisk. The question part for reasons passing understanding is always excluded from the phrase, probably so people can make false claims about the process and how it works.

A frisk is not a search.

The foundation for conducting such action can be found in Terry vs. Ohio.

A stop, question and frisk can be applied to a person as well as a vehicle.

FLETC Updates (Federal Law Enforcement Training Center)

The Terry Frisk was not ruled unconstitutional. The issue revolved around a "disproportionate use" of the terry stop, noting a larger number of Black and Latino individuals were stopped than white people. The Federal judges ruling required a written policy of when / how the tactic can be used and the NYPD created a report that had to be completed by the officer when a terry stop was conducted.

It is not illegal nor unconstitutional and the order solely affecting the NYPD is still in the Federal court system.

a reply to: CrawlingChaos

Let me know when the President assassinates Americans at home or abroad.

Trump is a wannabe-dictator. Are you really suggesting we should elect him and see what he does?

No thanks.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: CrawlingChaos

Let me know when the President assassinates Americans at home or abroad.

You mean like Obama and Clinton have done?

a reply to: Xcathdra

The foundation for conducting such action can be found in Terry vs. Ohio.

I think that ruling needs to be revisited as it applies to NYPD's "Stop & Frisk" procedures. I agree with the ruling as it applied in 1963 to a couple of pick pockets, that were observed picking pockets. But, I don't agree with applying to people who happen to physically resemble known pick pockets, i.e. "racial profiling".

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: rnaa

So , I gather from your Post that you Favor the Rights of Criminals of not being Identified by Law Enforcement Officials over the Right of Law Biding Citizens being Protected by the Law ? I see...........

America is full of Criminals at this point. I feel like everyone I know is a Criminal.

What I find astonishing is that Trump supporters, support Trump even when he advocates the very thing they claim to abhor. "The erosion of personal freedom"

Trump will shred the Constitution and usher in a Fascist police state totally subservient to the Corporations; A neocons wet dream.

What Delicious irony we are about to experience. Well, you are....I'll be long gone. Better get out while you can because that wall is to keep you in; not keep the Mexicans out.

a reply to: windword

Read the actual decision if you're interested. You'll find that what SCOTUS held is different than what is being presented here.

Stop and Frisk IS a search and seizure under the Fourth.

The Fourth applies to persons not places.

The question addressed in Terry was that the search was legal due to probable cause, and thus, the firearms discovered were admissible as evidence.

The Terry decision is not a wholesale approval of the "stop and frisk" procedure.