NYC Council overturns Bloomberg's veto on 'stop-and-frisk'

So much for the unconstitutionality of the Stop And Frisk. Looks like they have over ruled Bloomberg and are going ahead with The Community Safety Act that allows this kind of behavior from our Police Officers.

Judge Schira Scheindlin ruled on August 12 that the “stop, question and frisk” program instituted in by the NYPD in 2002 is unlawful, agreeing with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other civil liberty groups that the program has clearly and wrongfully targeted racial minorities. As a result, a federal monitor will be assigned to oversee the stop-and-frisk program.

Instead of it being unconstitutional its actually getting federal oversight. Their new focus is stopping profiling not the stop and frisk.

My My how that got turned around in a hurry. Wasn't the original issue on the frisk its self being unconstitutional unless your being detained with reasonable suspicion that you committed a crime?

RT

Government can do no wrong.

If it looks like there might be some wrong being done they just change the words and terms to mask the wrong.

The government policing itself is absurd.

Folks get all up in arms at the notion of say Wall Street policing itself yet when the entity with all the armies, all the guns, all the jails and all the money does it that's totally cool.

Stop and frisk is going to be eliminated. NYC will be electing a new mayor, almost surely a Democrat- all of which oppose the program.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


I believe that the government should have direct civilian oversight of all maters. By the people for the people....or so we have been misled.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


Well Bloomberg was overturned on the matter, what makes you so certain of this.

reply to post by shaneslaughta

Not to go too far off-topic, but "stop and frisk" was NOT deemed unconstitutional.

With regards to the actual issue in the OP, I'm a little confused.

It looks like Bloomberg vetoed legislation that would have looked to place restrictions on stop and frisk.

So the city council overrode those vetoes, which would be good for citizens.

The End Discriminatory Profiling Act, passed by a vote of 34-15, establishes an enforceable ban on profiling and discrimination by the NYPD...

Not sure how this can be enforced since 84% of those being violated are blacks and hispanics. I suppose it would have to drop to 50% white/50% non-white.

Either way, every minority is going to claim racism/profiling.

But they still wont get rid of it.

"Stop and frisk". Lets call it what it is: "the 4th Amendment violation act".

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


They wont stop it. Even if De Blasio got everything he wanted he wouldnt be able to stop it.

The behavior is so engrained in the NYPD at this point that anything short of immediately terminating any and every officer who pulled a "stop and frisk" wouldnt make any difference at all.

The unending harassment of a group of people is here to stay regardless of who becomes mayor and regardless of what they call it.

God himself could come down from the netherworld and proclaim a glorious and absolute end to the practice and it will still go on.

reply to post by gladtobehere


I was told otherwise that is was, possibly misled. I feel it is unconstitutional if you are not being stopped with reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime.

Apparently its an unlawful but was overruled by the NYC council. They support the stop and frisk even though...

Only 10 percent of all NYPD stops result in arrest. Guns are found in less than 0.2 percent of stops.

They are hassling the people, nothing more than flexing their oh so superior might.

You are not off topic as that's what this thread pertains to.

reply to post by shaneslaughta

Youre right, its DEFINITELY unconstitutional but Judge Scheindlin did not rule it unconstitutional.

The headlines over her ruling, IMHO, were intended to mislead the masses.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is going to get worse; its spreading, Detroit police adopt ‘stop-and-frisk. Its too much like harassment if you ask me. Painting "EVERYONE" with the same brush? So they are now all equal opportunity discriminators? Guilty until proven innocent seems to be a recurring theme as of late. What ever happend to its not a problem until its a problem? The lawmen used to be praised for going into dangerous situations. Its for their safety?
So that must mean alex jones was right? The comming police state.......IS HERE!

reply to post by shaneslaughta


Bloomberg is in favor of stop and frisk. The democratic council overturned him and with a democratic mayor it will be legislatively unanimous.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


For sure, many cops will conduct business as usual or find loopholes/probable cause to stop who they want. But there will be more and more accountability with the body camera experiments and I've heard some say that within 5-10 every cop will be wearing a camera.

I do not understand how this is allowed, as it is a clear violation of the 4th amendment. Trump on twitter the other day strongly supports this program, and is considering running for president(again). I just can't wrap my head around the changes we have gone through, and allowed our government to do all in the name of feeling safe.

This does not surprise me in any way. Government and others in the government structure do not care about the law and work in every way to go around not only the letter of the law but the spirit of the law too....

I would remind everyone that it is a SYSTEM and if you haven't noticed is that the players have changed but the way the scam is run never changes ....... Obama/Bush are just one small cog in the system ... it was built that way but now the corporate industrial complex has control of the system.....

reply to post by gladtobehere


Regarding your thread you linked...

In her long ruling, she determined at least 200,000 stops were made without reasonable suspicion, the necessary legal benchmark, lower than the standard of probable cause needed to justify an arrest.

link

I don't know that stop and frisk can be banned all together or if it violates the Constitution. Police have always had the authority to question anyone on the spot, you as a citizen have the right to refuse to answer and ask if you are being detained... if the cop says yes, you can ask for a reason... if the cop says no, you can walk away.

What was happening in NY was a jaw dropping percentage of hispanic and black males, especially young ones were being stopped and frisked on this spot without ever answering why they were doing it... they would then try to provoke individuals into doing something they could be arrested for.

The ruling makes it so cops cannot do that any longer and must conform to reasonable suspicion to stop someone, making the cops wear cameras should help achieve that aim. "Because you're wearing a back-pack" isn't a reasonable cause of suspicion.

As for the OP...

Bloomberg is a psychopath control freak with a (D) after his name but he belongs in a category unto himself such as (N) for the Napoleon or Narcissist Party . After the judges ruling he went about trying to circumvent it any which way could, the City Council isn't allowing it to happen... most of them have been fighting Stop and Frisk for years.