View Poll Results: Should stopping and frisking be illegal?

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • NO

    9 33.33%
  • YES

    17 62.96%
  • I DON'T KNOW

    1 3.70%
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 84

Thread: Stop and Frisk practices

  1. #61
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:07 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,723

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    It's "implied consent" but there's not much choice to it. Less you live in a big enough city where public transport is adequate; functionally you often need a car. Which means you must agree to the government's terms.
    That is the choice you make when you choose to drive. You really don't see any compelling need in enforcing traffic laws? Personally, uninsured drivers annoy the **** outta me, so catching them is ok in my book.

  2. #62
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,787

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    Awesome, so if I'm driving drunk at 100 mph, get pulled over then stash the dope that had been in my passenger seat into the glove box as the cop is walking up to my window and he sees me, he needs to let me go until he can get an arrest and search warrant?
    Maybe you missed the "not without probable cause" part. Drunk driving at 100mph is probable cause. Following all traffic laws is not.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  3. #63
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:07 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,723

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Maybe you missed the "not without probable cause" part. Drunk driving at 100mph is probable cause. Following all traffic laws is not.
    Actually, I did. I thought you were agreeing with what I asked (that searches and arrests should only happen with a warrant). You'll be happy to know, that searches do require probable cause - unless the person consents to the search.

  4. #64
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,787

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    Actually, I did. I thought you were agreeing with what I asked (that searches and arrests should only happen with a warrant). You'll be happy to know, that searches do require probable cause - unless the person consents to the search.
    Yet there are people who are reporting that the police are attempting to do searches without a warrant and without probable cause that anything illegal has actually occurred, through coercion or force or implied threats. That ought to be illegal. If they have a legally valid reason for performing a search that would hold up in a court of law, great. If not, then trying to push people to allow a search through threats ought never be allowed.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Everywhere and Nowhere
    Last Seen
    03-07-12 @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,692

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    Actually, I did. I thought you were agreeing with what I asked (that searches and arrests should only happen with a warrant). You'll be happy to know, that searches do require probable cause - unless the person consents to the search.
    The whole point of the OP was to address wanton searches without warrant as they are occurring more and more. We're not talking about cases of probable cause but cases where there is NO probable cause and instead we are just seeing systematic and generalized searches of vehicles in specific zones.

    Are you for or against that? Please clarify. Thank you.

  6. #66
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:07 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,723

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Yet there are people who are reporting that the police are attempting to do searches without a warrant and without probable cause that anything illegal has actually occurred, through coercion or force or implied threats. That ought to be illegal. If they have a legally valid reason for performing a search that would hold up in a court of law, great. If not, then trying to push people to allow a search through threats ought never be allowed.
    I can't say I disagree with any of this. All the things you say should be illegal actually are. The funny the thing is, the remedy for 4th amendment violations (the exclusionary rule) only benefits the people who are actually guilty. Weird, huh?

  7. #67
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:07 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,723

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Temporal View Post
    The whole point of the OP was to address wanton searches without warrant as they are occurring more and more. We're not talking about cases of probable cause but cases where there is NO probable cause and instead we are just seeing systematic and generalized searches of vehicles in specific zones.

    Are you for or against that? Please clarify. Thank you.
    Let me put it this way. I oppose forced searches without probable cause. I do not oppose searches or pat downs done without probable cause so long as they are conducted with the consent of person being searched. Does that clarify it for you?

  8. #68
    Sidewalk Inspector
    Utility Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,100

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Occupy Wall Street puts spotlight on police stop-and-frisk tactics | World news | guardian.co.uk

    Stop-and-frisk refers to a common practice within the NYPD where officers detain people on the street, and, in some instances, search them. The department, along with the mayor's office, both contend that the stops have contributed to a considerable decrease in violent crime in the city, particularly in low-income communities and communities of colour.........Adams claims he attended a meeting that included NYPD commissioner Ray Kelly, in which the senior officer stated that the reason stop-and-frisk is instituted at its current levels is to "instil in every young man from those communities [black and Hispanic] that any time they leave their house they can be searched by the police."

    "That's illegal," Adams says. "It's not the role of the police department to instil that level of fear in civilians."
    http://definitions.uslegal.com/s/stop-and-frisk/
    Last edited by Utility Man; 10-25-11 at 03:02 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    There were, by most estimates, 500 Nazis in Charlottesville. One of them went homicidal. Not all Nazis are violent extremists. You are trying to rationalize your hatred and it's simply not rational.
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    as I noted, its better that 10 nutjobs get guns than one good person be wrongly disarmed.

  9. #69
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:07 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,723

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Article's obviously a little skewed but the comments from NYPD do seem to suggest that they're actually detaining people and frisking them for no reason. There's no mention at all of consent. Not only should that be illegal, it is. Assuming something is found on one of the people that leads to a court case, I don't see how that evidence doesn't get thrown out.

  10. #70
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Stop and Frisk practices

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    That is the choice you make when you choose to drive. You really don't see any compelling need in enforcing traffic laws? Personally, uninsured drivers annoy the **** outta me, so catching them is ok in my book.
    I think that there are plenty of good traffic laws out there to increase safety and that driving, while it shouldn't be forced to come with 'implied consent" (which was just something the State made up in order to get around that pesky 4th amendment), it does not mean you can break all the laws. I don't understand why your examples and dissent have to be made to be so absurd. You could argue reasonably.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •