Stop and frisk ?????
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 14 of 18

Thread:
Stop and frisk ?????

  1. #1
    Senior Member Jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,509

    Default Stop and frisk ?????

    What are your thoughts on this controversial issue. Now the San Fransisco mayer wants to implement this.

    Is it OK to disregard the Constitution to fight crime?

  2. Remove Advertisements
    PerformanceBoats.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    gn7
    gn7 is offline
    Senior Member gn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    25,975

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jake View Post
    What are your thoughts on this controversial issue. Now the San Fransisco mayer wants to implement this.

    Is it OK to disregard the Constitution to fight crime?
    NO! it is not!! The liberal whiners will say yes, but they have all turned into Marxists socialist commies.
    This is the EXACTE reason the constitution was written to begin with. The residents of the American colonie had zero rights against the crown. None. Even BEFORE the revolution, the English military in this country took the food they needed from whomever they chose, slept and quatered whereever they chose, took horse and stock when and where ever they chose.

    You think they taxes where the whole reason. Not quite. It was a total vialation of anything that even remotely could be called human rights today. All by THEIR governement.

    Our government was set up to do EXACTLY what I have stated before. To RULE and CONTROL the government. To have the GOVERNMENT in fear of the people. NEVER, the people fearing THEIR government.

    We STILL have the power to stop things like this PEACEFULLY. But it may very well continue to the point that THIS government is replaced the same method the English government was replaced in 1776.



    100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

  4. #3
    gn7
    gn7 is offline
    Senior Member gn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    25,975

    Default

    From the Declaration of Independence.
    The British had it coming, and THIS governement was set up to avoid it from happening again, but just in case:


    That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.



    100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

  5. #4
    Senior Member SoldHondaBoughtHondo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Lake Havasu az.
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jake View Post
    What are your thoughts on this controversial issue. Now the San Fransisco mayer wants to implement this.

    Is it OK to disregard the Constitution to fight crime?
    I think some gay frisco cop putting his hand on my junk without p/c might cause me to break a law.

    Quote Originally Posted by gn7 View Post
    NO! it is not!! The liberal whiners will say yes, but they have all turned into Marxists socialist commies.
    This is the EXACTE reason the constitution was written to begin with. The residents of the American colonie had zero rights against the crown. None. Even BEFORE the revolution, the English military in this country took the food they needed from whomever they chose, slept and quatered whereever they chose, took horse and stock when and where ever they chose.

    You think they taxes where the whole reason. Not quite. It was a total vialation of anything that even remotely could be called human rights today. All by THEIR governement.

    Our government was set up to do EXACTLY what I have stated before. To RULE and CONTROL the government. To have the GOVERNMENT in fear of the people. NEVER, the people fearing THEIR government.

    We STILL have the power to stop things like this PEACEFULLY. But it may very well continue to the point that THIS government is replaced the same method the English government was replaced in 1776.
    It's not really the governments fault. It seems as though someone in security department fell asleep on the job and some riff raff sneak in. I guess security had a bit of difficulty identifying them at first, they had great disguises and all their paperwork seemed to be in order but there is an old guy in the security department, been doing it all his life, and while he might be a little slow, nothing ever gets by him.

    He is hot on the case as we speak......So if your group has any problems serving eviction papers through the usual process, our security specialist is ready willing and able to remove the unwanted guest from our property by any means necessary.

    I am sure it won't be a problem but if the situation happens to warrant his services his usual procedure in these kind of situations tends to be a little.........confrontational.....at first, followed by some minor kicking/screaming/racial slurs that always subsides
    right after the unwanted party gets hooked up with his state approved jewelry.

    Either way it works out, the results will be comparable. It will be very apparent to all those involved that 'We the People' are the ones that makes the rules and we expect them to be followed and violators will not be tolerated and the subject is not open for debate at anytime.
    "A liberal paradise would be a place where everybody has
    guaranteed employment, free comprehensive healthcare, free
    education, free food, free housing, free clothing, free
    utilities, and only law enforcement has guns. And believe it or
    not, such a place does, indeed, exist: It's called prison."

    Sheriff Joe Arpaio
    Maricopa County Sheriff's Office

  6. #5
    Floatin dirty Lavey29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,831

    Default

    Not sure about the mayor of SF. Don't go up there or have any intention of doing so for my own reasons. The "pat down search" for officer safety has been around forever and upheld in courts many times. Basically, if you are lawfully detained based on PC an officer can pat you down for weapons. Can't go digging through your pockets...etc...unless something feels like contraband or a weapon during the exterior pat down. This is pretty much common sense approach for safety reasons.

  7. #6
    gn7
    gn7 is offline
    Senior Member gn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    25,975

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SoldHondaBoughtHondo View Post
    I think some gay frisco cop putting his hand on my junk without p/c might cause me to break a law.
    It's not really the governments fault. It seems as though someone in security department fell asleep on the job and some riff raff sneak in.
    OH, I thought you had been to an airport lately and understood this type of activity is MORMAL for the feds.



    100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

  8. #7
    Floatin dirty Lavey29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,831

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gn7 View Post
    OH, I thought you had been to an airport lately and understood this type of activity is MORMAL for the feds.

    If you opt not to go through the body scanner correct?

  9. #8
    Senior Member f_inscreenname's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Pasadena, Maryland
    Posts
    1,544

    Default

    Funny how San Fran wants to do this but you cant ask if you are a legal citizen or not.
    A winner is just a loser that got up and did it one more time.
    1959 Biesemeyer - 4pt Hydro Drag - 2013 ACBS Winner - Best Race Boat
    1966 Donzi 16
    1967 Nova Marine - SuperNova24 - ACBS Winner - 2012 Best Race Boat - 2016 Peoples Choice & Best Non Wood
    1972 John Allmand - Nova 19
    1982 PolarKraft -Jonboat - Crab Killer

  10. #9
    gn7
    gn7 is offline
    Senior Member gn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    25,975

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lavey29 View Post
    If you opt not to go through the body scanner correct?
    I have been asked to go thru both. That was when I was fairly sure the asshole just wanted to grap my junk. Going thru the scanner is no guarantee that they won't still feel you up. That was the sole reason for going thru the scanner. I don't care to have some closet queen rubbing my stuff to his enjoyment.
    Next time I figure FUCK YOU. I go straight the "rub down and groping" ans side step the scanner. Why should anybody have to do both?



    100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
    Last edited by gn7; 07-28-2012 at 10:20 PM.

  11. #10
    Senior Member Jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lave View Post
    Not sure about the mayor of SF. Don't go up there or have any intention of doing so for my own reasons. The "pat down search" for officer safety has been around forever and upheld in courts many times. Basically, if you are lawfully detained based on PC an officer can pat you down for weapons. Can't go digging through your pockets...etc...unless something feels like contraband or a weapon during the exterior pat down. This is pretty much common sense approach for safety reasons.

    Lavey I like you but you are so far off on this I am amazed. Stop and frisk is in practice in New York and in Philly. Stop and frisk is just what it implies, a stop with no PC and a through frisk. I would like to bring to your attention that that action is entirely illegal as thoroughly discussed in our Bill of Rights. You remember, the right to come and go as free men. Additionally, your comment regarding a pat down for officer safety is border line for the aforementioned reasons and I don't care what liberal judge ruled on this and it should be struck down. This attitude that this is needed for officer safety is just a liberal crutch for getting around the Bill of Rights and, in my opinion, to be totally legal would require a Constitutional amendment. If this train of thought is to be continued what is next, the right to enter our homes to look for a weapon?


    Here is a rough re-cap of the results of New Yorks stop and frisk;


    blacks searched about 53%


    hispanics searched about 33%


    whites searched about 8%

    (not that I particularly care about profiling, I endorse it, it is effective but the attorneys will be screaming, tough shit).

    total searched 200,000

    Arrests about 10%

    Guns recovered about 4,500

    So as you can see this is a violation of 190,000 peoples rights to recover a paltry 4,500 guns, obviously an ineffective program at the publics constitutional expense. In addition, as you can see by the numbers it won't take a Rhodie scholar to prove racial profiling, with the current mindset.

    I suggest that the liberal judges have completely exceeded their authority in allowing this type of law enforcement. If they really wanted to be affective, they would gather up the balls and make a crime with a gun a mandatory life sentence and if a criminal pulls a gun on an officer the officer has the right to shoot to kill, no questions asked, period.

    I realize that LE doesn't write the laws but LE is sworn to uphold the Constitution and it's time LE honer that pledge regardless of what some liberal judge in the Ninth Circuit Court says, period.

    This judicial and political aptitude of violating citizens rights to take a few criminals off the street is just plain wrong.
    I was born a free man and I have every intention of dying a free man pursuant to my rights as outlined in the Constitution.

  12. #11
    Floatin dirty Lavey29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4,831

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jake View Post
    Lavey I like you but you are so far off on this I am amazed. Stop and frisk is in practice in New York and in Philly. Stop and frisk is just what it implies, a stop with no PC and a through frisk. I would like to bring to your attention that that action is entirely illegal as thoroughly discussed in our Bill of Rights. You remember, the right to come and go as free men. Additionally, your comment regarding a pat down for officer safety is border line for the aforementioned reasons and I don't care what liberal judge ruled on this and it should be struck down. This attitude that this is needed for officer safety is just a liberal crutch for getting around the Bill of Rights and, in my opinion, to be totally legal would require a Constitutional amendment. If this train of thought is to be continued what is next, the right to enter our homes to look for a weapon?


    Here is a rough re-cap of the results of New Yorks stop and frisk;


    blacks searched about 53%


    hispanics searched about 33%


    whites searched about 8%

    (not that I particularly care about profiling, I endorse it, it is effective but the attorneys will be screaming, tough shit).

    total searched 200,000

    Arrests about 10%

    Guns recovered about 4,500

    So as you can see this is a violation of 190,000 peoples rights to recover a paltry 4,500 guns, obviously an ineffective program at the publics constitutional expense. In addition, as you can see by the numbers it won't take a Rhodie scholar to prove racial profiling, with the current mindset.

    I suggest that the liberal judges have completely exceeded their authority in allowing this type of law enforcement. If they really wanted to be affective, they would gather up the balls and make a crime with a gun a mandatory life sentence and if a criminal pulls a gun on an officer the officer has the right to shoot to kill, no questions asked, period.

    I realize that LE doesn't write the laws but LE is sworn to uphold the Constitution and it's time LE honer that pledge regardless of what some liberal judge in the Ninth Circuit Court says, period.

    This judicial and political aptitude of violating citizens rights to take a few criminals off the street is just plain wrong.
    I was born a free man and I have every intention of dying a free man pursuant to my rights as outlined in the Constitution.


    Thanks for the info. I do not know about individual states laws and ordinances. I can only speak with knowledge of California (is it still considered a state) laws and applicable federal law on the topic. I do not believe randomly searching people who are not "legally being detained for some reason" is appropriate but it is a necessary requirement for safety reasons in certain areas such as getting on a plane. Heck, you get searched going into Disneyland, concerts, etc... I used to work a lot of OT at Magic Mountain. They had their own security but they conducted searches of bags and pat downs on persons entering the park. Why? It is private property and they have the right to do so but it was in response to various problems they had inside the park with assaults and weapons. It is a sad but inevitable response to an increasingly violent segment of society and unfortunately it affects everyone including the good people who are still the vast majority of society. I am a firm believer in the constitution and what it stands for. I think the 9th is a bunch of liberal clowns and the majority of their rulings are overturned on appeal to the supreme court.

    How do you guys feel about bomb dogs sniffing around the terminals or bags for metrolink? Does this violate your 4th or do you give up some of your 4th when you choose to ride the metrolink? Do you honestly feel that no searchng or limited searches should be done boarding a plane? On what basis by profiling? Profiling is an important LE tool. I am not going to deny that despite with libs or attorneys might say.

    I think what you posted about New York is just their response to being a target for terrorist for many years now. Does it seem unfair and violate the 4th just to randomly and arbitrarily search anyone and everyone even though they are not being legally detained for some reason if in fact that is what they are doing (I am not familiar with this) over there? On its face absolutely but if you factor in the reasons behind it with all that has happened over there over the years I can see this type of response occurring. Perhaps they will review the statistics (as you posted) and make modifications or adjustments to this type of enforcement procedure but again individual states can set their individual laws and until they are ruled unconstitutional by the high court they can go by them.

    I will stand by my earlier statement though that a "pat down" search is reasonable for officer safety if you are being legally detained for some reason. Same as having a driver exit the car on a traffic stop. High court has ruled that traffic stops are inherently dangerous so having the driver exit his car is considered ok and quick pat down for weapons is within reason IMO.

    To GN who keeps getting fondled every time he tries to get on a plane all I can say is god must have given you good genes and made you a good looking handsome man with well gifted endowment who apparently attracts other men or possibly you are wearing your pants to tight and showing to much bulge (weapon). I hope things get better for you.

  13. #12
    Senior Member Jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lavey29 View Post
    Thanks for the info. I do not know about individual states laws and ordinances. I can only speak with knowledge of California (is it still considered a state) laws and applicable federal law on the topic. I do not believe randomly searching people who are not "legally being detained for some reason" is appropriate but it is a necessary requirement for safety reasons in certain areas such as getting on a plane. Heck, you get searched going into Disneyland, concerts, etc... I used to work a lot of OT at Magic Mountain. They had their own security but they conducted searches of bags and pat downs on persons entering the park. Why? It is private property and they have the right to do so but it was in response to various problems they had inside the park with assaults and weapons. It is a sad but inevitable response to an increasingly violent segment of society and unfortunately it affects everyone including the good people who are still the vast majority of society. I am a firm believer in the constitution and what it stands for. I think the 9th is a bunch of liberal clowns and the majority of their rulings are overturned on appeal to the supreme court.

    How do you guys feel about bomb dogs sniffing around the terminals or bags for metrolink? Does this violate your 4th or do you give up some of your 4th when you choose to ride the metrolink? Do you honestly feel that no searchng or limited searches should be done boarding a plane? On what basis by profiling? Profiling is an important LE tool. I am not going to deny that despite with libs or attorneys might say.

    I think what you posted about New York is just their response to being a target for terrorist for many years now. Does it seem unfair and violate the 4th just to randomly and arbitrarily search anyone and everyone even though they are not being legally detained for some reason if in fact that is what they are doing (I am not familiar with this) over there? On its face absolutely but if you factor in the reasons behind it with all that has happened over there over the years I can see this type of response occurring. Perhaps they will review the statistics (as you posted) and make modifications or adjustments to this type of enforcement procedure but again individual states can set their individual laws and until they are ruled unconstitutional by the high court they can go by them.

    I will stand by my earlier statement though that a "pat down" search is reasonable for officer safety if you are being legally detained for some reason. Same as having a driver exit the car on a traffic stop. High court has ruled that traffic stops are inherently dangerous so having the driver exit his car is considered ok and quick pat down for weapons is within reason IMO.

    To GN who keeps getting fondled every time he tries to get on a plane all I can say is god must have given you good genes and made you a good looking handsome man with well gifted endowment who apparently attracts other men or possibly you are wearing your pants to tight and showing to much bulge (weapon). I hope things get better for you.

    You need to re-read the Constitution, it says what it says for good reason. It does not say that it can be bent and tweaked to convenience LE or the private enterprise.

    I think you are as level headed as any officer that I have ever spoken to and I mean that but if some judge told you it is OK to steal a pack of gum when ever you were in a store would you be OK with that? My point is that just because some judge says it's OK to violate the true essence of the Constitution does not make it OK under any circumstances. That is how we keep the ideals that so many people admire about the US society. As I said before, we need to implement other legal deterrents to stop criminals from being criminals that does not violate the general publics rights.

    This current run on the meaning of the Constitution if left un-checked will lead to the total destruction of the ideological meaning of the Constitution as time goes by. Look no further than where we are now with this current adminstration and their disregard for the true meaning of the document, where does it stop until the Constitution, as originally written, is so diluded that it becomes meaningless.

    Back on topic, stop and frisk is just wrong.



    Written with true regard for meaningful preservation of our American ways.
    Last edited by Jake; 07-29-2012 at 01:39 PM.

  14. #13
    gn7
    gn7 is offline
    Senior Member gn7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    25,975

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lavey29 View Post

    I will stand by my earlier statement though that a "pat down" search is reasonable for officer safety if you are being legally detained for some reason. Same as having a driver exit the car on a traffic stop. High court has ruled that traffic stops are inherently dangerous so having the driver exit his car is considered ok and quick pat down for weapons is within reason IMO.

    To GN who keeps getting fondled every time he tries to get on a plane all I can say is god must have given you good genes and made you a good looking handsome man with well gifted endowment who apparently attracts other men or possibly you are wearing your pants to tight and showing to much bulge (weapon). I hope things get better for you.
    Any search without PC is illiegal, I don't give a shit what label you chose to attach to it. Its nothing more than a gateway to further abuses which we all will live long enough to see. Babe steps, till hou cannot freely move about the city with out the fear of being stopped and search for zero reason.
    Being searched before getting on a plane or entering Disneyland or anywhere else can simply be avoided by not going there. Being searched and patted down going to the grocery store is another thing all together. Even being searched, handcuffed, and detained from your property without PC is common place of late. Seen it twice myself. It stone ass wrong!

    As for being searched in a airport AFTER going thru the scanner? I have since learned that the scanner was the REASON for the search, and it will happen to me ANYTIME I go thru a scanner, so now I simply side step that procedure as a waste of my time. I think the part that bothers me the most is, I KNOW what they are looking for, and it isn't that far up my leg.



    100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

  15. #14
    Already miss the 310/562 2manymustangs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    13,551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gn7 View Post
    From the Declaration of Independence.
    The British had it coming, and THIS governement was set up to avoid it from happening again, but just in case:


    That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.


    Yup, you are 110% right... The TAXATION part is an issue but that was WAY down on the list of reasons in the DOI for our founding fathers... The various abuse of powers were right at the top of the list and continued down the list in detail... It was much like our TOP HEAVY entitlement administration of today, grabing everything they can... INCLUDING YOUR JUNK!!!
    Last edited by 2manymustangs; 07-29-2012 at 06:26 PM.
    Pat Eason, the voice of reason...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Tags for this Thread

Digg This Thread

Posting Permissions

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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95