Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Devin^

NYPD may be restricted in suspect desciprtions...

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't say it is complete "bullshit" nor "irrelevant". As Naught pointed out, it IS a side-effect for the NYPD because it puts restrictions on how there job is done. It puts them at a potential risk for law suits based on race/gender/religious profiling. If they say a Hispanic man, walking with a cane, and has a goatee, and a small scar above his left eye, looks to be mid 50s. They need that information to deductively reason on who they can call suspects or not. Anybody can change clothes, dye their hair, or shave. They need Race/Gender/and Age, to be a factor.

 

Suggested Amendment

 

1. “[Racial or ethnic]Bias-based profiling” means an act of a member of the force of the police

department or other law enforcement officer that relies on actual or perceived race, [ethnicity, religion or]

national origin, color, creed, age, alienage or citizenship status, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or housing

status as the determinative factor in initiating law enforcement action against an individual, rather than an

individual’s behavior or other information or circumstances that links a person or persons [of a particular race,

ethnicity, religion national origin] to suspected unlawful activity."

 

If the police see somebody walking down the street, who matches the same; Gender,Race,Age,Disability, as the suspect but is wearing a different hoodie, it's saying that it is Biased to stop that person and ask questions. Because "Law Enforcement Action" can be as simple and legally "Justified" as stopping someone on the sidewalk to ask them some questions. Doesn't necessarily mean, cuffing and throwing them in the back of a NYPD black & white.

Not really, no, it doesn't say that at all. Police unions often hyperbolize legislation which curtails the very broad powers of law enforcement as destroying their ability to do their job, which is bullshit. I don't think I've heard of a single instance ever of a police officer being sued for asking a person questions on the street, and this new policy wouldn't make such an action less viable.

 

The purpose of the bill, if you actually read it, expressly forbids LEOs from using the aforementioned factors as grounds for taking law enforcement action, which could be pretty concisely defined as the special powers delegated to LEOs by the executive branch in their jurisdiction to carry out and enforce laws. Detaining and arresting people, pulling them over in their car, exerting delegated powers in that way on citizens purely because of the aforementioned traits would be illegal. Walking up to a person on the street and asking them a few questions wouldn't be illegal, however, and any claim that this bill says as much is tenuous at best.

 

Just last year the state senate here in Indiana passed an amendment to the state code on criminal law and procedure, specifically the sections pertaining to lawful force and self-defense, which made it legal for a person to use force to expel a public servant (including LEOs) from one's home, vehicle, or other property. This also includes use of lethal force. The law included provisions which were no more severe than any which were already on the books, except these amendments were tailored specifically to remove much of the immunity which LEOs enjoy in the judicial process. The police unions here went apeshit, naturally, erroneously claiming that the new "cop killer law" would have people murdering state troopers for pulling them over on the highway and all manner of nonsense, even though the law only makes it so that it's explicitly legal to use force to prevent a public servant from committing an illegal violation of one's sovereignty. The reason they were up in arms over it was because they didn't like the idea of holding less power over citizens in their daily interactions. It's been a year now and I haven't heard of a single instance of a public servant being killed or maimed by someone citing that law as a defense.

 

What you've seen and understood, then, is not the bill itself, but the histrionic rhetoric dispensed by the obviously biased and absurdly ill-informed police unions affected by this legislation; they're not interested in informing you and giving you the tools to come to your own decisions, they want to scare you into agreeing with them and falling in line with their beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post

To be fair however, that law in Indiana theoretically means someone could literally get away with murder of a police officer.  While in practice it may not have happened, theoretically it's possible to argue that as a valid defense in court.  I think it's more about the theoretical instances in this particular case where it might not happen for a year or ten, but in the end somebody gets away with a crime because of what essentially becomes a loophole in the law.  

 

That being said, I've never been treated more rudely then by American Police - it seems the power has a tendency to go to their heads sometimes? I doubt that's all cops or even the majority of them, but just my personal experiences.  In which case, something which makes them think twice about pulling you over or accosting you in the street for no apparent reason would be a welcome change.

Share this post


Link to post

To be fair however, that law in Indiana theoretically means someone could literally get away with murder of a police officer.  While in practice it may not have happened, theoretically it's possible to argue that as a valid defense in court.  I think it's more about the theoretical instances in this particular case where it might not happen for a year or ten, but in the end somebody gets away with a crime because of what essentially becomes a loophole in the law.  

This is kind of my point. The bill/law is written poorly. It does provide a legal loophole (in circumstance) in my opinion that could be exploited by a smart and attentive lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post

As stupid as this bill is, its doubly as stupid to call New York City shitty. Not only the greatest city in our country, but certainly one of the best in the world. Sometimes Fighter you are a complete retard, it's hilarious.

 

New York City, Gun control, stupid laws, stupid mayor, over crowded, high rent, everything is over priced. Yea what a great city it is!!! 

Edited by Chappy1212

Share this post


Link to post

New York City, Gun control, stupid laws, stupid mayor, over crowded, high rent, everything is over priced. Yea what a great city it is!!! 

Still better than Detroit

Share this post


Link to post

The NYPD runs the largest racial profiling program in the country. A little balance won't hurt. The reason Bloomberg and the unions are united against this is because it would make 98% of Stop and Frisk actions illegal, which is a good thing for the average citizen of NYC.

Share this post


Link to post

I grew up in the city. Not a place i raised my kid.

 

NYPD cops play their beat --a certain hand gesture, a look, radio squelch, cop-speech --all off the book.

 

Some Bill in Albany ain't gonna change it..., even if it passed.

 

It's the "Stop and Frisk" policy targeted. Quota based, "Stop and Frisk" is a crack-war relic i believe needs to end .

Share this post


Link to post

Would the radio comms be somthing like this?

 

" Suspect is human"

Animal rights activists would start bitching.

Share this post


Link to post

 

true

You could drop the whole population of Detroit in Queens and no one would notice. The crime rate in Corona would probably go down.

 

Detroit has affordable real-estate; currently under State trusteeship, the re-development plan is complete and far reaching.

 

Comparing Detroit to NYC? Makes no sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post

You could drop the whole population of Detroit in Queens and no one would notice. The crime rate in Corona would probably go down.

 

Detroit has affordable real-estate; currently under State trusteeship, the re-development plan is complete and far reaching.

 

Comparing Detroit to NYC? Makes no sense to me.

Detroit also has the 2nd most murders per year, just right behind New Orleans. It's population has gone from 1.029 million people in 1990 to 706,000 in 2011 (Now estimated at around 900,000 [2013]).  For every 100,000 citizens about 1300 of them will be a victim of aggravated assault, and there are also about 60 Forcible rapes per every 100,000 people.

 

New York City has over 8 million people in it. And it has less crime than Detroit.

 

Oh and affordable real-estate... Yeah, it's so cheap because NO ONE WANTS TO LIVE THERE.

http://city-crime-statistics.findthedata.org/compare/2870-4852/Detroit-vs-New-York

Edited by Devin^

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...