Reply
Platinum
Registered: 12/21/2007
Offline
55190 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 22, 2013

Thank you all so much for all the great feedback so far.   I'm truly looking for as many varied opinions as I can read on this.  

 

@ Vicky.   What are Englands laws about police interaction with citizens?  Do you have a law similar to our 4th ammendment (which I wrote the text to in the first post)?

 

@ Nightwish.  Why not state your opinion but just leave any vitriolic comments about the police out?   I'm sure you can tell me how you feel without slamming the police.  

 

 

Message 11 of 22 (118 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Keyblade Wielder
Registered: 05/30/2012
Offline
5453 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 22, 2013

PLYMCO_PILGRIM wrote:

Thank you all so much for all the great feedback so far.   I'm truly looking for as many varied opinions as I can read on this.  

 

@ Vicky.   What are Englands laws about police interaction with citizens?  Do you have a law similar to our 4th ammendment (which I wrote the text to in the first post)?

 

@ Nightwish.  Why not state your opinion but just leave any vitriolic comments about the police out?   I'm sure you can tell me how you feel without slamming the police.  

 

 


To search your house here, they need to have a warrant. That is mandatory. You can also refuse cops entry to your home. They can come in though if there has been a disturbance or someone has called them on you, but only if they know you are in the house.

x__Vee__x's Streambadge

Message 12 of 22 (114 Views)
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 12/20/2006
Offline
1491 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 22, 2013

I prefer my freedom and do not agree with this at all dont get me wrong like you stated Plymco if they see a gun or even if it looks like you have a gun I could understand them searching you but just because you look a certain way does not give anyone the right to pat you down and search you thats messed up and not only that this is not going to stop wit hthem just being able to search who they want this will turn into something bigger in the future it always does

Message 13 of 22 (108 Views)
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 10/08/2009
Offline
4918 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 22, 2013
This may be a little bit off topic, but I believe it does fit into the overall theme of the thread.

Does anyone remember what happened during the manhunt for the Tsarnaev brothers following the bombing at the Boston Marathon? The police shut down one of the largest cities in the United States, without declaring Martial Law, and conducted a door to door search of people's homes. I suppose this little end-around of the Constitution would be easier to swallow if it had yielded some sort of positive result. Sadly, it did not. The suspect was only found by a private citizen in an area already searched by the police.

The worst part is the majority of people applauded this action. To my knowledge the only person that seemed to have a problem with it was Rand Paul, who was run down by the media for being upset that people had their Constitutional rights violated. I'm sure the powers that be were watching all this with great interest.
Message 14 of 22 (92 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Platinum
Registered: 12/21/2007
Offline
55190 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 22, 2013

taker-77 wrote:
This may be a little bit off topic, but I believe it does fit into the overall theme of the thread.

Does anyone remember what happened during the manhunt for the Tsarnaev brothers following the bombing at the Boston Marathon? The police shut down one of the largest cities in the United States, without declaring Martial Law, and conducted a door to door search of people's homes. I suppose this little end-around of the Constitution would be easier to swallow if it had yielded some sort of positive result. Sadly, it did not. The suspect was only found by a private citizen in an area already searched by the police.

The worst part is the majority of people applauded this action. To my knowledge the only person that seemed to have a problem with it was Rand Paul, who was run down by the media for being upset that people had their Constitutional rights violated. I'm sure the powers that be were watching all this with great interest.

Yes I live here where that happened.   Many locals here did not approve of that, the radio was filled with calls and comments saying just how big of an overreach it was.  

 

You can definately bring this back to stop and frisk.  They aren't going door to door with it but they do go "person to person" basically. 

Message 15 of 22 (86 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Lombax Warrior
Registered: 04/20/2010
Offline
174 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 22, 2013

I think it's a horrible violation of people's rights.  I also think it's incredibly dangerous because it's yet another step in the road towards tyranny.  People need to realize that if we're lax against something like stop and frisk, the question often becomes, "Well, we got away with Stop and Frisk, perhaps random checkpoints on the streets?" or "Maybe we can stop people randomly and demand identification?"  People often reject the slippery slope argument, but it applies here, where does it end?  When is enough truly enough?  We have these protections as a block against government tyranny, our constitutional rights are the check and balance for the people against government.  If we ignore these acts of aggression, eventually we won't have a bill of rights anymore and the constitution will be a worthless document.

Message 16 of 22 (77 Views)
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 10/08/2009
Offline
4918 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 23, 2013

TheBigDumpMachin wrote:

I think it's a horrible violation of people's rights.  I also think it's incredibly dangerous because it's yet another step in the road towards tyranny.  People need to realize that if we're lax against something like stop and frisk, the question often becomes, "Well, we got away with Stop and Frisk, perhaps random checkpoints on the streets?" or "Maybe we can stop people randomly and demand identification?"  People often reject the slippery slope argument, but it applies here, where does it end?  When is enough truly enough?  We have these protections as a block against government tyranny, our constitutional rights are the check and balance for the people against government.  If we ignore these acts of aggression, eventually we won't have a bill of rights anymore and the constitution will be a worthless document.


 

I believe Arizona already has this in effect right now.

 

And I 100% agree with everything you wrote. Kudos.

Message 17 of 22 (73 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Keyblade Wielder
Registered: 04/02/2002
Online
9577 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 23, 2013

I live in NYC (Bronx) and have been Stop & Frisked many, many, many times.

 

There was several times where it would happen just for walking around the block on where i live.  All they have to do is say "you look like someone we looking for" and they can basically do what they want.  NYPD is a joke.  Been forced to lay on the ground a couple of times for them to search me too.

 

Trust me NYPD gets away with a lot.  More than what im sure most ppl outside of NYC even here about.

Message 18 of 22 (69 Views)
Welcoming Committee
Registered: 01/19/2004
Online
36565 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 23, 2013

PLYMCO_PILGRIM wrote:

I am very against this type of law. In my opinion it directly violates the 4th amendment of the United States which states "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


 

Agreed.  But since NYC has already violated the 2nd Amendment, the right to bear arms, the citizens are defenseless.  NYC liberals seem to think guns are evil, instead of a right.  So if guns are evil, then what's the problem with having cops confiscate them from evil people?

 

If you're going to bring back the 4th Amendment (and you should), then we also need to bring back the 2nd Amendment.  Otherwise, thousands of people will most definitely die.  All because some bleeding heart judge has a myopic and selective respect for the US Constitution.  Either you love and enforce the whole Constitution, or you are a traitor to the Republic.

 

"Yeah, I violate the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments on a daily basis, but I fully support the 12th Amendment..."  <--Treason.

 

P.S. People like this only "respect" the US Constitution when it suits their needs.  If it was unconstitutional to stop the Stop and Frisk laws, this judge would have still ruled the same way.

Message 19 of 22 (62 Views)
Platinum
Registered: 12/21/2007
Offline
55190 posts
 

Re: New York's Stop and Frisk Law

Aug 27, 2013

That is very true DrGadget and I find it very frustrating at the same time.   We have 3 branches of govt to provide checks and balances on power, but when we have all 3 branches appearing to ignore the limits the federal and individual state constitions put on the government what recorse do we, the people, have?    

 

Sure we can try and vote them out but between voting fraud, uneducated/unaware masses, and dishonest leaders in all 3 branches (i think several supreme court members do not care for the constittion) there is not any real recorse for us.  

 

I mean I could do the old "Tree of liberty" quote or say stuff like that but honestly I know that isn't a viable option either  (how many guns and rounds of ammo did the IRS and homeland buy anyway? Smiley Wink).   

Message 20 of 22 (40 Views)
Reply
0 Likes