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.

 

New cards explain NYC street stops by police

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Here's a list of the most violent cities in the US

List

I'm not seeing Portland on the list.

But, I do find Portland Or first on the list of America's favorite cities.

Favorite Cities




posted on May, 1 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Did anyone go to NYC in 2001? I remember being in the subway heading to Queens from Manhattan and on my way to the train there was literally a soldier with a big gun (not the best with weapons) every 5 feet on each side of the walk way. That was what changed my whole perspective on NYC. Then they started searching bags, and trust me I seen it with my own eyes, it was NOT a racial thing. They stopped me, and at the time I was a 17 year old girl (Irish). NYC has been heading in a bad direction since 911, so this doesn't surprise me one bit. IMO the only reason they are handing out these cards is to they don't have to waste time explaining why they just searched you, which frees up more time to search other people..



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
Here's a list of the most violent cities in the US

List

I'm not seeing Portland on the list.

But, I do find Portland Or first on the list of America's favorite cities.

Favorite Cities



Again, never said anything about violence. Said crime per capita.



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Guys, in the end it matters little what the crime rate is in any city.

A right is a right.

It's like saying we don't torture unless we have to.



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Guys, in the end it matters little what the crime rate is in any city.

A right is a right.

It's like saying we don't torture unless we have to.


Thanks you. The deflections from the topic were gettiing a bit overwhelming.

I find it amazing that anyone will defend this....



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by KaginD
Boys in Black EVERYWHERE.. not my idea of a good time anymore.


That is the most naive, over-exaggerated statement made on this post, yet.

Worse than pessimistic's assumption of Portland Oregon being the highest crime"per capita" city in America...



And on top, you mention the presence of authority in 2001!!!

waddya expect? 3000 (reported) dead, remember?

enough.

If you "REALLY" visit New York often, then you know you are exaggerating on presence of authority there.
They are not "EVERYWHERE" and they do not stop people walking by to search them just for the hell of it. That is a croc of sh*t, and blown way out of proportion. You know it.


Do you have any idea how much heat would be taken by the mayor and city officials of New York of these cops were searching people unlawfully?
Think about it!


And where are these complains????? Of unlawful searches??????


Don't you think New Yorkers themselves would've been ringing Giuliani's or Bloomberg's necks if they thought they were being violated.
Abd New Yorkers are known to step up and take this action, if these "searches" was really a big deal.....



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Where are the complaints? Here's a snippet:
manhattanviewpoint.blogspot.com...
www.nydailynews.com...
nypdconfidential.com...

Just because they dont report about them on the news, doesnt mean they arent there.

I do love that your justification for being okay with this is 9/11 though. Classic example of WHY that event happened.

You have shown your hand. You are of the"they say its for the best, so it is" mindset. Dont worry, those of us who can think logically will ask the questions for you.

[edit on 5/1/2009 by cautiouslypessimistic]

[edit on 5/1/2009 by cautiouslypessimistic]



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Ya' know, after reading quite a few posts in this thread, I just want to ask something...How many of you who are protesting now, were protesting back years ago when your local Wal-mart, K-mart, shopping center were keeping an eye on you while you shopped? I'm not trying to start a big argument, but wondering why it was ok for stores to place cameras to monitor activity (shoplifting) but now that it has become "personal" so to speak it's an outrage? profiling happens in store security all the time...Bags, big jackets, strollers, etc. are watched VERY closely so where was this conversation then, when it (big brother so to speak) first REALLY started happening...just wondering....and if you argue this post, then WHY is it ok for stores to "profile" potential shoplifters yet not on the streets???


edit to add...this is not for the people who are OK with the stops,
and one more thing...keep in mind store security is there to keep your PRICES DOWN shoplifting does eventually get passed on to consumers in cost of product...

[edit on 1-5-2009 by rockhndr]



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by rockhndr
 

1) Inside a store=private property. Big difference.
2)Profiling by a private business, while detestable, is a completely different topic than that done by a government agency.



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   
ok...I get that...but we're in agreement that there is a benefit to store security right? (keeping YOUR costs down)
so what's the difference with cameras in federal buildings, airports etc., I guess my point is, why are SOME precautions acceptable, yet others not?



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


Did you know that NYC also has the largest African American community than any other city in America?

And the the most ethinically and culturally diverse than any other city?

Almost 40% of NYC's population are foreign born!!!

Ohh and African American and Puerto Ricans are also the largest ethinic groups.....

This is not a racial matter.


ManhattanViewPoint.....great source!



*make me a sanguich and sit down*





[edit on 1-5-2009 by Ben Niceknowinya]



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ben Niceknowinya
reply to post by cautiouslypessimistic
 


This is not a racial matter.


It would be nice if you read all the posts ...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
 

So, you are not going to touch the material, you are just going to laugh at a factual source that shows browns are stopped more. Brilliant.

Are you actually going to debate this, or just continue with the backhanded insults and baseless statements?



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 


They can hand out all the cards they want but they can't stop anyone and search them without probable cause-so says the United States CONSTITUTION. Their little cards do not supercede the highest laws in the land.

There is absolutely no legal basis for this so there's no reason to comply.



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 


I did read it.
I think you misunderstood me Schrod.
What I'm saying is that if you look at all the ethnic and cultural (difference)in ratio comparison in the city of New York, almost 40% are foreign born.
That means almost half the people are "minorites" or racially and ethnically diverse than whites!



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
So what exactly is the bar for probable cause in NYC? Seems to be a little ambiguous if not bordering on arbitrary. The 4th amendment was designed to prevent exactly the type of programs mentioned in the OP. I hope it's only being exercised when probable cause is clearly present.



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


Ya' think someone should have let the Bush cronies in on that little bit of info?????
2nd line.....reminder to self...feed the dog-NO not YOU Schrodinger!!



[edit on 1-5-2009 by rockhndr]



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
 


Oh, all right ...

I'm honestly trying to understand where you're coming from here.

From what I gather, the basis of your argument is that NYC due to its nature has to somehow bend the constitution in order to curb crime.

However, as you yourself mentioned, crime was greatly reduced in NYC in the 90's. This was when Giuliani came in as the mayor, but the "stop and frisk" policy was NOT in existence yet.

So to me, the argument that somehow this is NEEDED is wrong on two front, 1. Constitutionally, and 2. Crime prevention in NYC has been proven possible without such draconian measures.



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
 

So, you are not going to touch the material, you are just going to laugh at a factual source that shows browns are stopped more. Brilliant.

Are you actually going to debate this, or just continue with the backhanded insults and baseless statements?


Did he say "browns.??"
Yikes!
Talk about racial profiling.....


Baseless statements? You're a real pieca work, you know that....
You couldn't run a bath nevermind a conversation.

You're the one getting pissy pissy here......
Me and schrod have complete different views on this matter, yet I wanna tip my hat to his discussion and intellect. All you're doing is generating negativity and posting bogus information.

And I won't need any hippy pest making any "intelligent"
decisions or asking any questions for me...like you posted above.
Thank you.

*I smell patchoulli*



[edit on 1-5-2009 by Ben Niceknowinya]



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ben Niceknowinya

Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
 

So, you are not going to touch the material, you are just going to laugh at a factual source that shows browns are stopped more. Brilliant.

Are you actually going to debate this, or just continue with the backhanded insults and baseless statements?


Did he say "browns.??"
Yikes!
Talk about racial profiling.....


Baseless statements? You're a real pieca work, you know that....
You couldn't run a bath nevermind a conversation.

You're the one getting pissy pissy here......
Me and schrod have complete different views on this matter, yet I wanna tip my hat to his discussion and intellect. All you're doing is generating negativity and posting bogus information.

And I won't need any hippy pest making any "intelligent"
decisions or asking any questions for me...like you posted above.
Thank you.

*I smell patchoulli*



[edit on 1-5-2009 by Ben Niceknowinya]


Okay man. you have IGNORED the proof of complaints (which you asked for) that I gave you. You ignore the 4th amendment. And you name call/;insult.

Yet I'm the one getting pissy


When you care to actually look at the facts, we can continue. When all you have is "its preventing crime, hippy", well, all I can do is laugh.

[edit on 5/1/2009 by cautiouslypessimistic]




top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join