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.

 

Police stop more than 1 million people on street

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 02:18 AM
link   
Well they are defiantly stopping the right people, the poor ones. Ones that can not afford attorneys to file lawsuits. Sounds like a class action to me. The police have overstepped the Constitution on this one totally.




posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by stevegmu
 


You have allot to learn my friend. Courts, jails & prisons are big business in fact in my State of Washington they eat up about 60% of our taxes.

Not only are they big business, but like any other business the more customers they can acquire or in this case the more people they arrest & process the bigger share a taxpayer money they get - they don't just count inmates to make sure they haven't escaped they count them because each one represents more income for that facility. That's a no brainier.

So, more arrest mean bigger future budgets - equals more fancy equipment, higher paid cops, judges, jailers, court clerks and other staff.

There's good reason they want to make more people criminals and it's called greed - the oldest form of evil on our planet.




[edit on 9-10-2009 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 03:19 AM
link   
Perhaps it's time for the police to change their strategy.

Instead of seeking guilt in the innocent, perhaps it's time to seek innocence in the "guilty".

After all, that is what our forefathers intended for our justice system.


Of course, that would stop the money from rolling in, so I suppose there is no hope for the system. Especially when the more misguided members of the population don't see a problem with it, because they are 'catching criminals'.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 03:35 AM
link   
What I believe is happening is that poorer or less educated people are being intimidated to agree to a search and just like we see on the cops shows allot of people either don't know their rights or they are tricked or intimidated into allowing a search by agreeing to it.

We have due process for a reason. The reason is because the cops back in the day would harass and intimidate the people to the point that the cops or King's soldiers were seen by the people as the criminals because they would do more damage to your liberty, property, business or family than any other criminal because they had the power and states authority to do so.

I don't want to live in a country that is like a prison or war zone where you lose more & more freedom and liberty through the use of checkpoints or police intimidation to search without cause or due process. I won't accept these tactics. I will not comply.


[edit on 9-10-2009 by verylowfrequency]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
Commissioner Raymond Kelly said recently that officers may stop as many as 600,000 people this year. About 10 percent are arrested.

"This is a proven law enforcement tactic to fight and deter crime, one that is authorized by criminal procedure law," he said.

~~~


So 540,000 people are stopped and let go because they were not doing anything wrong? Am I reading that right?



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 05:58 AM
link   
Things like this happens here in the UK a lot, the Police feel they have to be shown to be 'policing' the streets for teh safety of the people. Whilst I agree that it can be productive, I can't help but feel that they do it for fun or profit.
Its like this you have 100 people say in Brixton London, a notorious area in central London, well know for rough area it has become, there are nice people there, some who just want to be left alone to come and go as they please with hassle from no one. Then there are the trouble makers, the 'gangsta's' who want to intimidate the people , sell drugs and generally get up to naughty stuff.
Now the police feel they have to stop and search people in case they are carrying illegal leisure pharmaceuticals or weapons. Fine but the 'gangsta's look like ordinary people so the police stop anyone who in their infinate experience looks 'suspicious'.
Then it comes down to 'racial profiling', racial abuse and harrasment.
None of us want to be stopped, but if we do know your rights, keep your mouth shut and just ask a; why are you being stopped? b; what justification for you being stopped and c: if they have no real evidence or suspicions then just say " I'll be on my way" and then step away. If they try to grab you , fall to the ground and claim assault or stumble over as if they had made you lose your step.
I have been stopped by police a few times over the years and if you talk to them but not shout or get angry they'll leave you to walk away, be constructive but not abusive.
Ask why your being stopped, for what reason and why you seemed suspicious to them? and they'll just see that you've got a point and let you go , but as soon as your agresive they'll keep you longer than neccessary just to pee you off more and then hope you get angry and violent.
If they the UK police that is keep you standing around longer than 12 minutes you can walk away as its an unreasonable time to be kept waiting. or so I've heard.
The majority of the time I've been stopped is for riding my motorcycle but if your polite and seemingly intelligent they'll try to catch you out but stay on your toes, stay calm and you'll get away, even if you've got 'something you shouldn't have' on you.
And yes some people are stupid enough to get angry and hurl abusive at the police and TBH they get what they deserve.
You might all want to watch Chris Rock ( asswhooping) on youtube ( cant access it here at work to get the link) but its applicable in being stopped by the narks funny but insightful.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 06:24 AM
link   
I live in NYC. The closest thing to this are the subway checkpoints. Two or three cops have a table setup near the turnstiles in large stations who occasionally stop people and check their bags. Just like the occasional cop brandishing a large automatic weapon it is mostly there to deter would-be terrorists IMO. I pass two separate checkpoints DAILY and have yet to be stopped, and I carry a backpack. I also don't know anyone who has been randomly stopped and frisked. Still, just because I don't see it happen....



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 06:34 AM
link   
On the "racist" argument- that is total bs, the higher crime areas would tend to be more likely to be where blacks live, and consequently blacks would be more likely to be VICTIMS of crime as well, so if they didn't do these sorts of checks, then would that be racist because it would be ignoring black victims of crime



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by stevegmu
 



Okay, I want to know. I've seen you here on these boards replying specifically to "police state-esque" threads..

Who pays you to come here and spew your fascist authoritarian crap all over everyone's face?

Are you playing a very clever devil's advocate, or do you just enjoy crapping on everything?

Like when you said in a thread that the students killed at Kent State Uni. were just an "honest mistake" because the troops were "overwhelmed". You went on to say that there was a curfew and it was their fault anyway.

Honestly... what's the deal here?

[edit on 9-10-2009 by SyphonX]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   
In my city everyone can carry a hangun openly and most do so this would never go over well. Must be a yankee thing, it would never happen in the south.




posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by DataWraith
 


And it is prodominantley blacks or muslims who are being stoped and searched. You do not see a rise in white people being stopped and searched in the UK.

Just seems these stop and search or stop and search laws are targeting the poor or those whom live in run down areas, while they really should be targeting those who are the real criminals, the politicians, those behind the scenes trying to control everything we do.

[edit on 9-10-2009 by Laurauk]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Ah yes the stop and frisk. "we gota search you for our protection"

Sad thing is, I bet a large % of that 10% is for the HARMLESS drug marijuana.

NYC these past few years has become the marijuana arrest capital of the world. EVEN though it is decriminalized in new york state............... A high percentage of minor marijuana arrests are blacks and hispanics, even though the majority of the population is white. Why is this? Simple, racial profiling.

These pigs no longer want to do detective work, they rather just go out and violate our constitional rights to achieve their agenda.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by stevegmu
reply to post by harvib
 


Police don't stop and search people randomly in my area, or anywhere I go. I don't live in or walk in ghettos. You do know these programs target high-crime areas, correct?


Well Steve if you live around GMU and the White house there are plenty of reason to stop and frisk everyone walking around "K" street cause the politicians are guilty of stealing more than any petty thief.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by SyphonX
reply to post by stevegmu
 



Okay, I want to know. I've seen you here on these boards replying specifically to "police state-esque" threads..

Who pays you to come here and spew your fascist authoritarian crap all over everyone's face?

Are you playing a very clever devil's advocate, or do you just enjoy crapping on everything?

Like when you said in a thread that the students killed at Kent State Uni. were just an "honest mistake" because the troops were "overwhelmed". You went on to say that there was a curfew and it was their fault anyway.

Honestly... what's the deal here?

[edit on 9-10-2009 by SyphonX]


Syphon I was thinking the same thing I have been keeping an eye on these post from him as well.



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   
luckily or unluckily alot of people here on ATS are very much pro-profiling.

Let's see which side of the fence they stand when they become the victim



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   
youll probably start noticing a rise in police deaths.

dont know why we havent already.

this is outrageous, unconstitutional, and plain wrong.

people committing no crime, getting treated as criminals.

people will start acting like it, if it doesnt matter if they are or arent, and still get treated the same way



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   
As a former law enforcement professional, I understand the difference between a "stop" and an "arrest." Rudy Giulianni took the right approach with his "broken windows" policy in New York of heading off minor crimes as a deterrent to bigger ones.

Arpaio's effectiveness with illegal aliens and other potential criminals must just gall those in Obama's administration who would rather turn our streets and cities over to criminals, in the name of "equality."
"DHS Bars Arizona Sheriff from Enforcing Immigration Laws"
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Since when are criminals or potential criminals entitled to "special treatment?"

If real crooks know cops are out and about, actively looking for potential problems, they'll take their "business" elsewhere. (Like keeping the lights on, to stop the roaches from coming out.)

Crime dropped dramatically as a result of these tactics in New York and elsewhere.

Even I've been involved in "stops" by wary police. It didn't upset me, as I was out late, alone, and felt a little safer knowing they were close by during my jogs.

The same methods have been tried elsewhere to similar success. One of the remarkable failures was in the hands of the thuggish, corrupt, LAPD.

Most PDs using these tactics keep detailed records of the nature of these events, and outside reviews have found them fair and effective, even when balanced against the "intrusions" involved in each encounter.

Arpaio's crime patrols were just as effective. Most cops know to use a legitimate means to establish a "reasonable suspicion" to justify the stops. Or make one up.

"Burned out taillight," "we got a call ... " and other excuses permit a temporary detention.

So what?

If you didn't do anything in otherwise "suspicious" circumstances, what's the big deal?

I'd rather have THEM stop me during a jog or walk than a couple of guys who want to rob me. Maybe their presence keeps the bad guys away.

Arpaio's guy's will continue to use lawful tactics, but for some reason, the Obama administration would rather just turn the streets over to criminals.

My community benefits from "active policing." We have LOW crime rate. People feel safe out at night. We walk, talk, and enjoy our homes, restaurants and bars, parks and shops ANYTIME, day or night, without fear of becoming a victim or statistic.

No one will ever convince me that this isn't effective, despite the "hassle."

jw

[edit on 9-10-2009 by jdub297]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
luckily or unluckily alot of people here on ATS are very much pro-profiling.

Let's see which side of the fence they stand when they become the victim


there are subtleties to profiling. i think you lump everyone who thinks that illegal immigrants should be profiled in with everyday americans being profiled as the same.

its not. and no people dont like profiling, but for some reason this article goes far beyond just profiling, to just mass harassment



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 

luckily or unluckily alot of people here on ATS are very much pro-profiling.

Let's see which side of the fence they stand when they become the victim


Victim of what?

Profiling? I'm white/hispanic, male, professional (although you can't tell from just by looking). I live in two different places: one the richest county in the state, the other, one of the poorest in its state. I've been "stopped" in both places. Usually for being in the wrong place at the wrong time; i.e., late at night, alone, walking or running.

I wasn't doing anything "wrong" any of the times I was stopped. Now, when they see me, the cops know who I am and what I'm up to. It sometimes seems tht thet are looking out for me when I walk or jog at night. (almost like a "police escort")

Victim of crime? I would much rather have to endure a couple minutes' hassle to explain myself, than to get robbed or worse. Everyone else benefits because we ALL feel safer when we go out.

What ever happened to "crime prevention" as police activity.

It is much cheaper and immensely smarter to spend limited resources DETERRING crime, than having to investigate, report, arrest, convict and imprison the criminals AFTER THE FACT!

What would any of you prefer: enforcement or prevention?

I'd like everyone of you who have posted thus far to answer that question.

Choose one answer:_______________________.

jw

[edit on 9-10-2009 by jdub297]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   
I think we all need to know what the police are doing right now.
They want to get everyone they can on there books for the slightest weapons violation to a simple speeding ticket. The system works; so check your six keep your head down be polite and make each contact you have with LE the best for them don't show your hand so when it really matters you won't be on paper. Think covert and be smarter.


Choose your battles wisely. It is easy to fall prey to every pettiness that comes your way. Backbiting, criticisms, bullying - all these could dampen our spirit and make us react negatively. It is not only time-consuming, it could also be emotionally-draining. Do not make mountains out of molehills. If you wanna win, choose your battles wisely. You need not go into a battle mode each time someone throws a negative remark at you. Let the unimportant things slip away. The emotions you invested in these petty quarrels could take its toll on you so don't engage in petty battles.


www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov...


The effects of a carefully monitored and increased police patrol on the report of crime were examined in four patrol zones. Overall patrol movement was increased to four times normal levels and slow patrol movement (under 20 mph) to around 30 times normal levels for 10 days. The patrol was active in two zones between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. and in the other two zones between 7:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. A multiple-baseline design and time-series statistical analyses showed statistically reliable changes in reported levels of Part I crime (such as robbery, burglary, and aggravated assault) during both night patrols, but not in the day patrols. In both night-patrol zones, there were also reliable increases from saturation patrol to postsaturation patrol in report of Part I crime after the night patrol was terminated. Neither of the day patrols showed significant crime report changes on termination. Despite statistically reliable decreases in report of crime during nighttime hours, the value of saturation patrolling as a crime-prevention technique was questioned on cost/benefit grounds.



new topics




 
21
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join