Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: is stop and frisk legal

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Lompoc, Ca
    Posts
    8,430
    Thanks
    1,286
    Thanked 1,472 Times in 1,090 Posts
    Groans
    475
    Groaned 278 Times in 249 Posts

    Default is stop and frisk legal

    even though it is effective at lowering crime

    so would entering and searching peoples homes without a warrant

    it strikes me as a violation of innocent until proven guilty

    http://news.yahoo.com/nyc-mayor-defe...184637461.html
    I pledge allegiance to the constitution of the United States of America as amended by the legislative and executive branches and interpreted by the Supreme Court

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,488
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    stop and frisk violates the 4th Amendment. Police MUST have an articulate and reasonable suspicion that you have committed a crime, are committing a crime, or are about to commit a crime in order to detain you for investigative purposes. The fact that the NYPD has gotten away with it for so long is those that are affected cannot find a lawyer or afford a lawyer willing to take the case.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  3. #3 | Top
    Guns Guns Guns Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    ...The fact that the NYPD has gotten away with it for so long is those that are affected cannot find a lawyer or afford a lawyer willing to take the case.
    You mean the 99%?

  4. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,488
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by \\()// View Post
    You mean the 99%?
    that would depend upon whether you consider the police officers union as part of the 99% or the 1%.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  5. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,855
    Thanks
    121
    Thanked 649 Times in 481 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 64 Times in 62 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Originally the frisk was instituted for police safety after somebody had already been stopped to ensure they weren't carrying a weapon. It seems to have just become common practice. Most people however don't know that if a cop asks you to turn out your pockets, you are under no legal obligation to obey.
    "In the bath tub of history the truth is harder to find than the soap and more difficult to hold on to."

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    It's not the cops fault that the douchebag is a fraud.

  6. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    life
    Posts
    52,794
    Thanks
    13,341
    Thanked 22,579 Times in 15,814 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,951 Times in 1,862 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Disillusioned View Post
    Originally the frisk was instituted for police safety after somebody had already been stopped to ensure they weren't carrying a weapon. It seems to have just become common practice. Most people however don't know that if a cop asks you to turn out your pockets, you are under no legal obligation to obey.
    then they "detain" you (non arrest) bring out dogs, to sniffout your car.
    The 4th amendment, as are all the Bill of Rights are only as enforced as we choose too. SCOTUS has pretty much said there is no right to privacy -anywhere.
    Soon there wil be 'domestic drones', as well as the other Patriot Act incursions into civil liberties. Congess had brought into this, and given the executive extreme latitude to do as they please.

    We've allowed this to happen, we don't demand any restriction on 'security", so we abandon liberty. Everyone knows what the Ben Frankilin phrase is regarding the 2.

Similar Threads

  1. nypd to 'revise' stop and frisk policy
    By Don Quixote in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-17-2012, 06:03 PM
  2. Do we all agree pot should be legal?
    By Jarod in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 03-04-2010, 08:56 PM
  3. Is it still Legal?
    By cancel2 2022 in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-13-2009, 09:36 PM
  4. APP - Just make them legal
    By tinfoil in forum Above Plain Politics Forum
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 09-22-2009, 11:14 PM
  5. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 06-16-2008, 07:01 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

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