Stop and Frisk ruled unconstitutional

Pretty much a no-sh!t ruling.

"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"
 
Stop and frisk was a trap for pot users.
Ny decriminalized it but yet has the highest arrest rates then any state.

They'd tell you to empty your pockets so you get busted on "brandishing a controlled substance in public" vs a simple fine. Or of you wouldn't pull it out your get busted on other stuff .
 
sad that it seems to be racial profiling that doomed this procedure, rather than simple outright 4th amendment violation.
 
"But now people will run around with rocket launchers and flame throwers!!!11!!!1!"

Soda Ban: Reversed
Stop-and-Frisk: Unconstitutional
SAFE Act: _______________
 
sad that it seems to be racial profiling that doomed this procedure, rather than simple outright 4th amendment violation.
This. WTF does profiling have to do with this? Its a pretty obvious issue of RIGHTS. Don't fool yourselves into thinking that NYC suddenly decided to abide by the constitution; this is just another "discrimination case".
 
This. WTF does profiling have to do with this? Its a pretty obvious issue of RIGHTS. Don't fool yourselves into thinking that NYC suddenly decided to abide by the constitution; this is just another "discrimination case".

There's a fairly simple explanation for the mention of "racial profiling." The majority of people who felt they were being stopped and frisked more often than not belonged to one "racial" group or another. This ruling is about the Constitution and the Judge made that clear in her ruling.
The loser is Bloomberg and his "I can buy anything I want" mind set.

Best regards.
 
There's a fairly simple explanation for the mention of "racial profiling." The majority of people who felt they were being stopped and frisked more often than not belonged to one "racial" group or another. This ruling is about the Constitution and the Judge made that clear in her ruling.
The loser is Bloomberg and his "I can buy anything I want" mind set.

Best regards.
Why spend all that time trying to prove profiling when instead all they had to do was show that this stop and frisk policy is unconstitutional? And what if the groups that were profiled never came forth? Would stop and frisk continue?
 
A logical response for this would be for the NYPD to continue profiling, but randomly stop people who don't fit the profile - white tourists, finance district workers, etc. I wonder how that will go over.
 
sad that it seems to be racial profiling that doomed this procedure, rather than simple outright 4th amendment violation.

My thought also, although the judge seemed to have the correct attitude:

"No one should live in fear of being stopped whenever he leaves his home to go about the activities of daily life," Scheindlin wrote in her opinion.
 
Why spend all that time trying to prove profiling when instead all they had to do was show that this stop and frisk policy is unconstitutional? And what if the groups that were profiled never came forth? Would stop and frisk continue?

I will guess that the same mind set that Prosecutors use when they throw anything that may or may not apply at a person accused of wrong doing in the hopes that something will stick was used by the Attorneys in fighting this unconstitutional policy.
According to reports 5 million people have been stopped since this policy went into effect. I imagine stop & frisk would continue until somebody challenged it through the courts.
Best regards.
 
As a result, officers often frisked young minority men for weapons or searched their pockets for contraband before letting them go, in a violation of the Constitution's Fourth Amendment that protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, the judge said in a 195-page decision.

195 pages?! It would have taken me about 3 sentences!
 
my shocked face.

really. i'm actually surprised at this. figured they'd be OK with it. there's SOME hope...

Yes and no. I am a little shocked too but I still don't see NY ever being a land of freedom.

You're past the point of no return when bullshit like this ends up being decided by the courts. Unconstitutional? Wow no ****ing shit. I'm pretty sure if you're attempting to illegally frisk me you'll get pistol whipped. Or at least a big "**** off". This is good news but holy shit, what a can of worms this could have opened.

This. WTF does profiling have to do with this? Its a pretty obvious issue of RIGHTS. Don't fool yourselves into thinking that NYC suddenly decided to abide by the constitution; this is just another "discrimination case".

This
 
A logical response for this would be for the NYPD to continue profiling, but randomly stop people who don't fit the profile - white tourists, finance district workers, etc. I wonder how that will go over.

This is what is likely going to happen.

From the article:

"To fix the constitutional violations, the judge designated an outside lawyer, Peter L. Zimroth, to monitor the Police Department’s compliance with the Constitution."

If the law was truly deemed unconstitutional and was vacated there would be no reason to appoint a lawyer to fix the unconstitutional part.

Bob
 
sad that it seems to be racial profiling that doomed this procedure, rather than simple outright 4th amendment violation.

I would have to read the actual decision to see if the racial profiling angle actually played a central role in the decision, but it is no surprise that the media is highlighting that aspect. I shouldn't complain too much though, because after all, it is bascially Bloomberg who is being labeled a racist here! [laugh]

Very bottom of one of the articles:
She noted that about 88 percent of the stops result in the police letting the person go without an arrest or ticket, a percentage so high, she said, that it suggests there was not a credible suspicion to suspect the person of criminality in the first place.
 
Like it matters

The NYPD will continue to do it, you guys put to much faith in the system

Noting that the Supreme Court had long ago ruled that stop-and-frisks were constitutionally permissible under certain conditions [rolleyes], the judge stressed that she was “not ordering an end to the practice of stop-and-frisk[thinking]. The purpose of the remedies addressed in this opinion is to ensure that the practice is carried out in a manner that protects the rights and liberties of all New Yorkers, while still providing much needed police protection.”

~Protecting the S*** out of all NY'ers not just the Black and Hispanic ones.
 
As I said in the off topic section thread about this, stop and frisk wasn't found unconstitutional. The judge essentially said that not enough whites were stopped and frisked.

Also, since they let 88% of the friskees go, they had no reason to stop and frisk to begin with. So now they'll stop some bankers and not let weed possession go.
 
And here I was thinking sobriety checkpoints days were numbered. All this false hope is making me ill
 
it's actually a bad ruling in the long run because of reasons stated above. the program won't have to stop, it will just have to come up with more conviction and make more white's break the law
 
Back
Top Bottom