• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

MSM is definitely protecting Michael Bloomberg

Roadvirus said:
No one cares that he thinks minorities should be thrown against walls by the police?
Click to expand...

The same amount as people cared that Trump and his daddy kicked black people out of their houses because they knew they couldn't pay the rent. Now Trump Tower is literally filled with white collar criminals and foreign nationals.
 
HumblePi said:
Unbeknownst to the majority of people, stop-and-frisk had been a crime-prevention strategy that had been a staple of policing in the United States for more than 30 years before Bloomberg took office. Mike Bloomberg expanded it when he took office in 2002. People frequently leave out an important word from the 'stop and frisk' policy. The word that's usually omitted is, 'question'. The policy was 'stop, question and frisk'. Bloomberg's intention was to cut down on the murder rate and crimes in NY and the majority of crimes were occurring in the boroughs of NY where minority populations are prevalent. The focus was on stopping crimes but many innocent people were being stopped and frisked setting off a storm of protests from civil liberty groups.

It's not a coincidence that during Bloomberg’s first year in office, the number of murders in the city fell below 600, and dropped to 335 by the time he left office in 2013. Even as the amount of crime rose or fluctuated in other cities, New York’s crime rate declined, continuing a streak that had begun in 1991. The program was actually working.

We have a sitting president that's grabbing power that targets specific religions or an entire race specifically because of their race not because of the motivations of the human conditions that compels them to travel to the US border seeking amnesty and a better life.
Click to expand...

I think I agree with you, but it almost sounds like you offer a defense of stop, frisk and question. That of course is how the Germans handled society during the Third Reich. Yes, authoritarian regimes are based upon such tactics.
 
Roadvirus said:
No one cares that he thinks minorities should be thrown against walls by the police?
Click to expand...

Trump agrees with Bloomberg

During the debate in 2015, Hillary Clinton was against stop and frisk while Trump was strongly in favor of stop and frisk. Does Bloomberg's policy of stop and frisk seem okay to you now that you know that Trump fully supported it?


 
NeverTrump said:
The same amount as people cared that Trump and his daddy kicked black people out of their houses because they knew they couldn't pay the rent. Now Trump Tower is literally filled with white collar criminals and foreign nationals.
Click to expand...

blah blah blah BUT TRUMP! :roll:
 
HumblePi said:
Trump agrees with Bloomberg

During the debate in 2015, Hillary Clinton was against stop and frisk while Trump was strongly in favor of stop and frisk. Does Bloomberg's policy of stop and frisk seem okay to you now that you know that Trump fully supported it?


Click to expand...


Trump did not say target minorities NOR did Trump say to throw black people against a wall. It isn't about stop and frisk at all. You are just desperately trying to change the topic. It is about targeting minorities and authorizing/bragging about police abuse against black men.
 
Roadvirus said:
No one cares that he thinks minorities should be thrown against walls by the police?
Click to expand...

Black people care.

Do you think BLM will endorse Bloomberg?
 
joko104 said:
Trump did not say target minorities NOR did Trump say to throw black people against a wall. It isn't about stop and frisk at all. You are just desperately trying to change the topic. It is about targeting minorities and authorizing/bragging about police abuse against black men.
Click to expand...

I gave you three links (3) that PROVED that Donald Trump not only validated the fact that he believes in the policy of stop and frisk but that he rigorously promoted the practice. Trump also lectured the cops not to be 'too gentle' with people they arrest, remember that one?
 
HumblePi said:
I gave you three links (3) that PROVED that Donald Trump not only validated the fact that he believes in the policy of stop and frisk but that he rigorously promoted the practice. Trump also lectured the cops not to be 'too gentle' with people they arrest, remember that one?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do. I don't have a big problem with stop and frisk in a crime wave. The problem is saying criminals are young black men, openly having uneven policies on arrest, prosecution and sentencing for black people, and having being "not too gentle" targeting blacks. That is ENTIRELY what BLM is about - not about "stop and frisk" - other than it was targeted specifically at black people.

It is not about the policing aspect, it is about the racial aspect. See the distinction? I think black voters will. I do, but then I am familiar with "targeting" of minorities - particularly when I lived in Chicago in a black neighborhood.
 
Helix said:
He's toast. However, don't be distracted by the idiot king's accusations of racism. Simply do a google search for stop and frisk and Trump. He's all up in that, as well.
Click to expand...

The Tweet deletion was pretty swift.
 
HumblePi said:
Unbeknownst to the majority of people, stop-and-frisk had been a crime-prevention strategy that had been a staple of policing in the United States for more than 30 years before Bloomberg took office. Mike Bloomberg expanded it when he took office in 2002. People frequently leave out an important word from the 'stop and frisk' policy. The word that's usually omitted is, 'question'. The policy was 'stop, question and frisk'. Bloomberg's intention was to cut down on the murder rate and crimes in NY and the majority of crimes were occurring in the boroughs of NY where minority populations are prevalent. The focus was on stopping crimes but many innocent people were being stopped and frisked setting off a storm of protests from civil liberty groups.

It's not a coincidence that during Bloomberg’s first year in office, the number of murders in the city fell below 600, and dropped to 335 by the time he left office in 2013. Even as the amount of crime rose or fluctuated in other cities, New York’s crime rate declined, continuing a streak that had begun in 1991. The program was actually working.

We have a sitting president that's grabbing power that targets specific religions or an entire race specifically because of their race not because of the motivations of the human conditions that compels them to travel to the US border seeking amnesty and a better life.
Click to expand...

New York's decline in crime was also largely due to the improving economic situation in the city along with other policies which tackled the prevalent drug dealing in minority neighborhoods. I remember when the police unleashed the tactical narcotics team, which would set up all sorts of raids to bust dealers and users. You had to be really aware of your surroundings to not get caught in the dragnet. Basically, if you saw one or two moving trucks and some kind of unmarked van on the block, you were best served by leaving the area ASAP lest you get thrown against the wall by cops in SWAT gear.

As for stop and frisk, I felt it was a poorly executed strategy mainly because it lacked precision. Had it been employed using the intelligence gathered through community policing, it might have been more effective since the people stopped would have been those the police were aware of being potential threats. Instead, police would stop all sorts of people just going about their business. I was stopped several times when walking home late from the train station. What always bothered me the most not being able to walk freely and spoken to disrespectfully. The one incident that sticks out the most was when after I was stopped and searched, one of the cops asked me where I was coming from. I told him I was coming from work because it was the only shift I could work while going to college. He said "a lot of good that's gonna do ya. I'm sure we'll be locking you up soon enough". That always stuck with me because it encapsulated all that was wrong with that policy. When quotas were introduced that made matters even worse because the pressure was on to stop even more people.

Fortunately, studies started coming out which proved what many people in my community already knew: more innocent people were being stopped and harassed than were being arrested. One study showed that out of 700,000 stops 88% did not find any evidence of criminal activity. Now, if stop and frisk would have been targeted at the people in the community who known to be trouble makers, then it might have been far more effective and gotten community support. In my experience, the policy only served to make the police another threat in addition to the criminal element.
 
The right has been complaining for years how bad the media is, they who refuse to do fair journalism... only to be mocked as dummies by the Left.

Could it be that the Left is finally figuring out how bad the problem is, and how bad the problem is for America?

BETTER LATE THAN NEVER!
 
HumblePi said:
I gave you three links (3) that PROVED that Donald Trump not only validated the fact that he believes in the policy of stop and frisk but that he rigorously promoted the practice. Trump also lectured the cops not to be 'too gentle' with people they arrest, remember that one?
Click to expand...

And Trump took out full page ads in NYT arguing that the Central Park Five should have been treated worse than they were. He is and always has been an authoritarian racist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom