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: 8
13
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
 


Oh dear, I see that having served in the armed forces apparently entitles one to a more legitimate opinion.

There's no need to get personal you know, notwithstanding your apparent vexation, I believe I have earned the right to my opinion ... I don't feel I need to explain myself to you in that regard, my mirror and my conscience tell me so. And I am an American, by choice by the way, so what I "do" to preserve constitutional rights does not require defense.

As far for being a "liberal," though I am not one and despite your tonality, I find no insolence in that accusation, though if it makes you feel better please carry on with the labeling.

You keep harping on this "it's not about you" bumper sticker but as we all know a populace is but a collection of "I" and "You." Again, under your premise there is a fundamental constitutional shift of the "reasonable" principle and one that erodes individual freedom. Not only MY freedom but YOURS and everyone else's as well. YOU may be ok with that, others including myself are not, and as you YOU so eloquently stated, it's not about YOU.




Sorry SDog, if I came across as personal. It's not that I disrespect you in any way. I mean it. I'm built a little different than you, and I tend to get into it, but in the end I find value in our discussions. Not vexation.

Again, I apologize if I offended you.
As for me being in the Armed Forces, you have it wrong. I DO NOT feel I have ANY more right than you, or ANYONE. No.
If you think I felt this way, would it be fair to say that I wouldn't be interested in your opinion, anyway???

"""However, thankfully for all of us, societies evolve and each generation of immigrants enjoys lesser persecution. """
btw, you completely proved my point with that statement.


This topic (or OP) is about the legality of "stop & frisks" in the city of New York. My opinion is that it's not a big deal, and we can easily deal with it, like they have in New York for several, several years now.
You're the one throwing the Constitution, in MY face, and that my opinions are un-Constitutional, correct?
I've earned my opinion, just like you, just like anyone here.
And I'm not "asking you to explain yourself" I simply asked what actions you've actually taken for your causes and concern, in particular towards the "preservance" of the Constitution.
I'm glad your conscience makes you humble in judgement, truly.
However you have yet to provide your true reasons, efforts in actually making a difference in this matter.
Such as community work?
Supporting court cases of people you felt were treated unjust and unfairly?
Organizing a prtoest?
Or just badgering others by waving the Constitution, suggesting that people who differ with you are un-Constitutional, and that people are being treated unfairly, and unordinary.?

Don't take that the wrong way SDog. I'm not trying 2 step on your toes, or be out of line here.
I give a sh*t 2. And I'm glad you do 2. Alteast we are humble in conscience with this accordance.
I never called you a liberal either (look up). I said cut this liberal BS out.
If I thought you were a liberal, I don't think you would be interested as much. I know that. You're not a liberal.
(now that clear)
We just have different views of what "personal freedoms" really are?
We can both agree on that.?
We both also might have different views on diligence in general.
I don't thnk I directed "everything" I wrote towards you any way.
It might explain why you thought I was vexating.
I'm sorry for the both of us in that case. Truly.

Carry on.





[edit on 3-5-2009 by Ben Niceknowinya]




posted on May, 2 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
 


It's all good, it was this little guy
that got my panties twisted.


Anyhoot, it seems to me that our/the argument is mostly based on the the elasticity of rights. For you a greater elasticity is justifiable to accommodate for special circumstances such as NYC.

You know, not long ago I was actually debating your side of the argument. Last summer here in DC, in a terribly violent neighborhood called Little Trinidad, they instituted checkpoints on the street and only residents could get in. This was done at the request of the residents who cried out for police protection from gang violence after people get getting killed by stray bullets.

Whilst many here cried out constitutional violations, I defended the action under the premise "listen, you don't have to live there, people/children are dying and they're doing their best to protect them."

I say this because I want to be honest. While I may seem inconsistent in this regard, I still believe that in this case there are different issues in play. Namely those you call "liberal." The NYPD is racially profiling the public, they are being sued for it, and that I find just plain wrong.

[edit on 2 May 2009 by schrodingers dog]



posted on May, 2 2009 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
reply to post by Ben Niceknowinya
 


It's all good, it was this little guy
that got my panties twisted.


Anyhoot, it seems to me that our/the argument is mostly based on the the elasticity of rights. For you a greater elasticity is justifiable to accommodate for special circumstances such as NYC.

You know, not long ago I was actually debating your side of the argument. Last summer here in DC, in a terribly violent neighborhood called Little Trinidad, they instituted checkpoints on the street and only residents could get in. This was done at the request of the residents who cried out for police protection from gang violence after people get getting killed by stray bullets.

Whilst many here cried out constitutional violations, I defended the action under the premise "listen, you don't have to live there, people/children are dying and they're doing their best to protect them."

I say this because I want to be honest. While I may seem inconsistent in this regard, I still believe that in this case there are different issues in play. Namely those you call "liberal." The NYPD is racially profiling the public, they are being sued for it, and that I find just plain wrong.

[edit on 2 May 2009 by schrodingers dog]



I know, he's a little bad a*s who spits flames!

Nah, but thanx for understanding me a little better without making judgement on me. It's a genuine quality. I assure you.
My nature's like that little guy up there. You should hear how me and my friends talk 2 each other.....
you would be mortified.
It's why I marked you as a friend instead of a foe, because you're genuine in nature. We just lived completely different lives, and it's why we're all actually so different in America. It's Beautiful imo.
Like I said, I'm humble for the fact that we both give a sh*t.
In the end, we want to preserve the same thing, which is positive.

All Good. All Day and Day.

I know. I remember reading about it. And I'm familiar with Little Trinidad's case.
In NYC, Washington Heights was like that for a couple years, it was so bad.
Even certain areas where I grew up, and I know New Orleans now too.....
But you know what? This might be a good example of how things can prove positive in the community. Where criminals are intimitaded, and people aren't intimitaded by the criminals and so forth.... Double edge sword-of-a-thought I guess.......

I believe some (of the) main elements are: Love Your Family. Love your country. And Help your neighbors.
If we can do this, the future of this country might become brighter than it is now.
I'm also looking to see it through.
The value of family, and community, it's where we need to start.
I remember this Governor of Boston, his name was Bill Weld, turned out to be a real bum,btw, but when I was young, he said something I'll never forget:
"The most important desk you'll ever sit in, is the dinner table."
Being in my mid 30's now, I can relate to how important that thought was.
The values of it.

Even though he was a bum....

In anyway, it shows the importance of idealism, free thought, and the matter of opinions and its significance.... even though you might not agree with someone, you might learn something from that some1, and in the end accept your differences.
We shouldn't take for granted our experiences, yet embrace the learning we receive from them.......I don't know........
It's what makes us go forward. I guess.




))))))))))ARCH((((((((((






[edit on 3-5-2009 by Ben Niceknowinya]



posted on May, 2 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   
One of the things that will trigger a suspicion of a law enforcement officer is if the person being questioned will not look them in the eye . This is a self defense mechanism to hide and avoid direct confrontation or to avoid having their lies from being found out . That is all good for white Anglo Saxons . But officers learn in some areas from training seminars dealing with racial sensitivity the psychological profile of hiding or guilt exhibited by whites is null and void when dealing with other races who are taught not to look in the eyes of a person of authority it is very disrespectful. So the suspicious behavior is or can be based on a officers own racial back ground and in the eyes of the mainstream which is from a Anglo view.

Officers learn that if they tail a car long enough they will find a reason to pull it over . Even drivers ed teachers or the best driver will fall to prey of some little thing . If after being tailed for 10 - 15 min it is easy to come to the conclusion the diver is acting nervous = reason to pull the car over.
turn too soon = reason to pull the car over
turn to late = reason to pull the car over
turn turn signals on to late or too soon = reason to pull the car over
change lanes to slow or too fast = reason to pull the car over
start to fast or to slow = reason to pull the car over
stop to fast or to slow = reason to pull the car over
malfunctioning equipment = reason to pull the car over
a swerve even if avoiding a obstetrical in the road way = reason to pull the car over
chips larger than a quarter on the windshield = reason to pull the car over
a damaged hood or fender or body panel = reason to pull the car over.

If we take the criteria used to pull cars over to walking pedestrians you can clearly see that the reason to search a person is at a the whim of a officer .

These tools are needed but with strict rules or they will be miss used. I still feel the policy is too far over the line to be constitutionally correct .



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 06:44 AM
link   
Special thanks to all contributors in this thread, by the way. Especially Jfj123 for a very copy and paste section of this card. Just seemed too solid of a statement to leave it out.

So, if cops can give us cards to explain themselves, for what reason can we not give THEM cards? I know it may seem a bit immature to stoop to their level, but the whole situation seems irrational anyways, so we might as well just play their game and see who wins. Who knows, perhaps some cops have simply forgotten about the fourth amendment and just need a little reminder that it exists.

Please refer to the image below
It is a pre-emptive response card to your search. If you would like a larger format, let me know. If you think you could improve upon it, as I have surely left out some important things, also let me know. Also feel free to hotlink!



I'd like to state that I agree with everyone on this thread who fights for our constitutional rights as US citizens.

Furthermore, I disagree with anyone who would challenge the bill of rights. These are OUR rights. If we start dismissing them, we will undoubtedly get the slippery slope effect defined by previous post. It is extremely important that we defend these rights as a people, because if we don't our founding fathers will be ashamed us, for ruining something so beautiful as America.

Now, keep in mind that Amending the constitution by due process is totally cool. But until that day, we must remember the law as it stands.
And as it stands, these Stop-And-Frisk procedures are not only WRONG, they violate the law above all other laws, the United States Constitution.



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog


Where you aware of this?

I wasn't ...

Apparently NYC cops can "stop &f risk" anyone at any time because they reasonably think they have something to hide.

What is reasonable?
....
Good luck if you're a minority ...

The ACLU has filed a lawsuit against the policy and in this case rightfully so.

Under this standard pretty much anyone can be accused of "reasonable" suspicion.



In NYC you are actually far less likely to be "Stopped, Frisked, or Questioned" than you are in many other sections of the Nation. Trust me, I have spent plenty of time in the City, and the area in general, and more of the Police Officers up there have a thicker skinned attitude as opposed to the Police I have witnessed in the Washington, D.C. Metro area.

As a matter of fact, when I was younger up in NYC one time, I had a bandanna on, the baggy clothes, the jewelry and all of that, and a NYPD Officer glanced at me when I was walking towards him, but never once did he harass me, much less even stare me down with one of those dirty suspicious looks that Officers often give to teenagers. That is a far more "chill" attitude if you will, than what I often witness in much of Virginia or Maryland.

I have even witnessed a NJ LEO (West New York, or Hoboken area) respond to a disorderly call of a drunken lady once, wherein the lady ran at the Officer, screamed at him, and even punched him, YET, the LEO never once lost his temper or attempted to arrest the individual. He simply had her calm down, and made certain that she made it to her residence alright (Meaning in an unharmed state).

Obviously LEOs vary even within their own Departments, but my experience with NYC area Police Officers has left me with the impression that they are overall much less concerned with tossing the book at you for everyday situations, as opposed to many smaller Metro/Suburban areas where the LEOs could not be happier than to toss you behind bars for such absurdity as making illicit U-turns or Raising your voice at them.

[edit on 5-4-2009 by TheAgentNineteen]



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   
welcome to AMERICA 2009!! I cant wait til 2020 should be a great country with alot of barbwire



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join