Stop and Frisk

Mayor Bloomberg: We Don't Stop and Frisk Enough Minorities

New Yorkers voted for this guy three times

|

Stop and Frisk by Dandelion Salad, on Flickr
Dandelion Salad/Flickr

Michael Bloomberg doesn't know the meaning of the words "lame duck," or humility for that matter. The Democratic contenders vying to replace him come November have pushed to pass two bills they believe would make stop and frisk more palatable to New Yorkers, or at least potential voters. One bill would set up an independent Inspector General for the NYPD. The other would allow people to sue if they believe they've been targeted by police on the basis of race as well as age, gender, sexual orientation or housing status. It leaves no remedy for someone targeted by police unfairly for a plethora of reasons (such as fuck you that's why). Both bills passed with a "veto-proof majority" but the mayor will veto anyway, because he doesn't see any problems with stop and frisk (which he's repeated many times before as the program faces legal challenge). From Capitol New York:

Not only has the mayor vowed to veto both bills, but he's also seeking to protect those vetoes from an override by turning some now-supportive councilmembers.

"The racial profiling bill is just so unworkable," he said today. "Nobody racially profiles."
"It's society's job to make sure that no one group is disproportionately represented as potential perpetrators," he added.

The mayor went on to cite the city's murder rate, which has fallen dramatically during his tenure, and argue that now is not the time to conduct a "social experiment."

"There is this business, there's one newspaper and one news service, they just keep saying, 'Oh it's a disproportionate percentage of a particular ethnic group,'" he went on. "That may be, but it's not a disproportionate percentage of those who witnesses and victims describe as committing the murder. In that case, incidentally, I think we disproportionately stop whites too much and minorities too little."

But the statistics show a higher percentage of whites than blacks that are stopped and frisked are found to be carrying a weapon (though even among whites the percentage is too low to argue police had anything like probable cause for the search), suggesting that racial profiling is exactly what the police are doing.

Bloomberg made it to Reason's 45 Enemies of Freedom list in the latest issue, at newsstands now.

Advertisement

NEXT: Alec Baldwin's Real Twitter Problem Isn't Homophobic Ranting - It's the End of the Red Carpet

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. But the statistics show a higher percentage of whites than blacks that are stopped and frisked are found to be carrying a weapon […] suggesting that racial profiling is exactly what the police are doing.

    Mmmm, maybe. It could be that the visual/behavioral clues the police are using to choose people are more accurate with whites. Maybe lots of blacks dress and act like gangsters purely as a fashion statement. That seems more like gangster profiling than racial profiling.

    1. Or maybe black people are generally more nervous and agitated around cops. Can’t imagine why that would be.

    2. Or it could be racial profiling. It’s not like cops deserve the benefit of the doubt in this regard. What exactly is “gangster clothing?” Is wearing baggy pants or a do-rag grounds to be stopped and frisked by cops? We all know mobsters wear fancy suits, I guess we they should start stop and frisking Wall Streeters? I’m sure they could get away with that just as easily as they can get way with doing it to blacks and Latinos in the Bronx, right? There’s nothing even approaching probable cause in the vast majority of these searches, for any race. Whatever criteria they’re using is obviously bullshit

      1. There’s nothing even approaching probable cause in the vast majority of these searches, for any race.

        I’m not disagreeing with that.

        1. I’m glad to hear that.

          I still think the evidence is pretty convincing that these searches are racially biased. Even you if you assume that conscious racism isn’t the cause, whatever criteria they’re using are racially biased, which has the same effect. A disproportionate number of those stopped are black or Hispanic and among those stopped, blacks and Hispanics are less likely to be breaking the law. I’m not willing to give the cops the benefit of the doubt for a few reasons: 1) Based on history, they don’t deserve it 2) Living in LA, I’ve seen it with my own eyes, so I know it still happens in this country 3)I have a good number of friends from NYC who mostly agree it’s even worse back there

          1. These stops and searches are illegal. It makes no difference if they are racially motivated or otherwise. They are all fucking illegal.

            1. I disagree that it makes no difference in one regard. If this program targeted average white people the way it targets blacks and Hispanics, it would get shut down in an instant.

            2. “These stops and searches are illegal. It makes no difference if they are racially motivated or otherwise. They are all fucking illegal.”

              So where the fuck is this in the legal system? How long do people need to put up with this blatant violation before it’s struck down?

    3. No. They’re profiling race, and minorities have been victims of stop and frisk bullshittery for years.

      Fuck Bloomberg and fuck Stop and Frisk.

      1. Fuck, stop, and frisk.

  2. Billionaire Jews are a minority. How often should they be frisked?

    1. But they control everything, so it evens out.

    2. Any time they do a financial transaction.

    3. When they buy a Big Gulp

  3. It leaves no remedy for someone targeted by police unfairly for a plethora of reasons (such as fuck you that’s why).

    Ed, you’re my new favorite.

    1. So easy is the commentariat’s favor, and yet so fickle.

      1. ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?

  4. Pyonyang on the Hudson

  5. If only there was some rule, some law, some… philosophical treatise which forbade random, warrantless searches.

    A man can dream.

    1. Who would have thought that this would degenerate into accusations of racism rather than a flagrant disregard for that Constitution thingy.

      1. Though one can argue persuasively that this is a Constitutional problem, one cannot argue that it isn’t a race problem as well.

        1. The thing is it should never even get that far. Race shouldn’t be an issue at all because at that point you are ceeding legitimacy to the practice by arguing about how it’s practiced. I’m absolutely certain that NYPD is racially profiling and while that is reprehensible attacking stop-and-frisk on those grounds is akin to demanding that someone who is beating you in the head with a nightstick must stop the nightstick part instead of the beating part.

          Equal protection tyranny?

          1. This. The profiling argument smacks of the variety of “disparate impact” rationales used to allege unconscious or cryptic racism. Either accuse NYPD of intentional racist policies or critique s&f as blatantly unconstitutional, or both, but let’s dispense right now with the idea that s&f would be conscionable if cops molested whites in numbers equal to blacks.

            1. I don’t think anyone here is saying it would be ok.

              1. I’d agree, but I would also put forth that focusing on racial profiling in s&f is setting up a tactical victory that leads to a strategic defeat.

                I’ve seen this so many times now. Massive government overreach, public outcry over the most disgusting part of the overreach, government gives back a little, but in the wake of the “victory” over the worst abuse the basic overreach remains in place. Over and over again we’ve lost liberty in this manner and we’ve got to stop falling for it. Even libertarians fall into this trap and the racism/profiling version is about the worst offender.

                1. “I’d agree, but I would also put forth that focusing on racial profiling in s&f is setting up a tactical victory that leads to a strategic defeat.”

                  The question is, does bringing up the racial profiling aspect of it actually lead to a strategic defeat? I think this would get a lot less attention if the race aspect wasn’t mentioned at all, and I certainly don’t think it would lead to a strategic victory.

                  As I said below, I agree that focusing exclusively on the race issue can be counterproductive in a way, in that it can give the impression that everything would be ok if it wasn’t racially biased. It must be emphasized that the program is wrong regardless of who it targets. That doesn’t mean it makes sense, strategically, tactically, or morally, to completely ignore the race aspect of it.

                  1. That doesn’t mean it makes sense, strategically, tactically, or morally, to completely ignore the race aspect of it.

                    I think that every horrible aspect of the program deserves attention. What I fear, and have seen happen is that so much energy gets expended trying to dislodge one specific vulgarity that there’s little to nothing left to tackle the core problem.

                    My guess here is that some form of oversight will be established to stop the racial abuse, probably along with some taxpayer money going to fund some worthy liberal race related causes, and the uproar dies down while the violation of 4th carries on daily but in a “fair” way.

                    I expect that from liberals, but I think of it as courting strategic defeat because these are the moments libertarians can use to make clear that it is the violation of the 4th amendment that causes these and so many other horrible consequences and the entire idea behind it must be utterly rejected to prevent it from happening in some other place and some other manner.

                    1. I mostly agree with that. The racial component should be a secondary, not a primary, criticism of the program. But in this day and age, it is an effective tool for drawing attention to the issue, and it is an opportunity to appeal to minorities. I think a lot of minorities aren’t really all that happy with the Democratic Party but continue to support them because “at least they’re better than Republicans” (to them). Most people (regardless of race) can’t get away from thinking about things in dualistic, two-party terms.

                      I also agree that a couple meaningless gestures would/will probably be enough to quiet the political left. However, I’m skeptical those steps would actually be effective in stopping or significantly alleviating the racial bias, let alone the broader problem of the unconstitutional nature of these stops, regardless of race. I don’t think that the people actually affected by it (inner city blacks and Hispanics – and I know quite a few from New York City, so I’m not just baselessly speculating here) would shut up, but the political left would, at least for a while.

      2. I’m surprised that the Constitution gets mentioned at all. Everything these days is race related and the Constitution is just some old document written a long time ago with strange words and phrases by dead white men who owned slaves.

        1. Violate the constitution away, just make sure you violate away in an equal and culturally sensitive way!

      3. This is the fruit of the despicable Terry vs. Ohio decision and it’s subsequent interpretations.

        The fact that the Supreme Court didn’t see or care how “Terry Stops” and “Administrative Searches” would be abused is what got us here.

        1. New professionalism!

  6. suggesting that racial profiling is exactly what the police are doing.

    I know that race is the only way to get the MSM out of their deep, deep slumber, but can we stop referring to unconstitutional searches as a race problem, and start referring to them as a constitutional problem?

    1. It’s both, but I do agree that focusing exclusively on the racial component can give a sense of legitimacy to the searches if they’re not conducted in a racially biased manner. And that’s not right. These searches are wrong and unconstitutional regardless of the race of who’s being searched.

      1. can we stop referring to unconstitutional searches as a race problem

        No. Next question.

    2. I know that race is the only way to get the MSM out of their deep, deep slumber, but can we stop referring to unconstitutional searches as a race problem, and start referring to them as a constitutional problem?

      I think the race problem is part of the constitutional problem, though. Obviously it violates your rights against unlawful search and seizure, but it also could be considered a violation of the equal protection clause. Racial profiling in this way, and the targeting of people based on race, probably violates equal protection under the law.

      1. Maybe so, but do you think that the end result of all this will be anything other than targeting a few more white people? The race part will be “solved”, and everyone will be A-OK with the unconstitutional search and seizure of innocent people because the correct ratios are being applied.

  7. such as fuck you that’s why

    Don’t pander to us, Ed. It’s beneath you.

    1. Pander shmander.

      In other words, KEEP PANDERING. We like-a the pandering. Yum yum.

  8. If police officers are compelled to pause and consider the possible consequences of their actions, New York will be just like Tombstone in the 1880s!

    1. What, ran by a murderous thug paranoid about others having access to weapons?

      1. … and to salt shakers and large sodas.

  9. It’s beneath you.

    That seems unlikely.

  10. “It’s society’s job to make sure that no one group is disproportionately represented as potential perpetrators,” he added.

    a) What the fuck is that even supposed to mean?

    b) YOU, despite your sanctimonious strutting and preening, are not God’s representative of “Society” placed here on Earth to lead us out of our mire of ignorance and sin.

    Every time I think I cannot possibly despise that megalomaniacal little fuckwad more, he proves me wrong.

    1. Bloomberg has careened off of Megalomaniac Highway onto Technocrat Street and is barreling straight towards Wanna Be Dictator Avenue, where hopefully he will slam into a wall.

      1. Hehe, that makes me think of this Douglas Adams quip from The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul:

        Dennis Hutch had stepped up into the top seat when its founder had died of a lethal overdose of brick wall, taken while under the influence of a Ferrari and a bottle of tequila.

    2. I don’t think the man even knows what he’s arguing. He’s just spewing out words. He first states that “Nobody racially profiles.”. Then seems to argue for racial quotas with the line, “It’s society’s job to make sure that no one group is disproportionately represented as potential perpetrators,”. Then, by arguing that it’s society’s job, he states that “now is not the time to conduct a ‘social experiment.'”

      WTF, I think Bloomberg proves the infinite monkey theorem with a single monkey in a time period of a single day.

    3. a) is his asshole way of saying that it isn’t his fault that most criminals are minorities, so stop blaming him for profiling.

  11. Sounds like some very serious smack to me dude. Wow.

    http://www.GetAnonz.tk

  12. @Joe M. So right about “fuck you that’s why.” Why is that any different than race or gender or anything else? And the law forces the “fuck you that’s why” people to choose a false category for their grievance.

    The policy of stop and frisk allows creates entitled bullies. Sometimes bullies are bullies for bullying’s sake. If they can’t do it for race, gender, age, etc. they’ll resort to fuck
    you that’s why.

  13. “The other would allow people to sue if they believe they’ve been targeted by police on the basis of race as well as age, gender, sexual orientation or housing status.”

    I thought we already had a law against arbitrary searches called the Fourth Amendment.

    1. Oh? What’s the punishment for breaking it?

  14. Though it could be a race issue, that is a subset of the Constitutional problem. Truly solve the constitutional problem and the race problem becomes a lot less (in deed if not in mind).

  15. I think we disproportionately stop whites too much and minorities too little.

    That is a great lesson for minorities who think voting for Democrats is going to protect them. If a Republican had said that, his career would be over. But since Bloomberg is a liberal in good standing, nothing will happen to him. He won’t even be criticized.

    If the day comes that minorities need to be sacrificed for the cause, then racism will be the order of the day.

    1. If the day comes that minorities need to be sacrificed for the cause, then racism will be the order of the day.

      It’s already been that day for as long as I can remember.

    2. But since Bloomberg is a liberal in good standing, nothing will happen to him.

      Maybe if we were an enrolled Democrat. Actual Democrats are giving him shit for it.

  16. Yes, as through this world I’ve wandered
    I’ve seen lots of funny men;
    Some will rob you with a six-gun,
    And some with a fountain pen.

    And as through your life you travel,
    Yes, as through your life you roam,
    You won’t never see an outlaw
    Drive a family from their home.

    This is why they don’t bother with Stop and Frisk in Midtown, or Wall Street.

  17. Shorter Bloomberg:

    “Nobody racially profiles.”

    “We don’t racially profile…”

    “That may be, but it’s not a disproportionate percentage of those who witnesses and victims describe as committing the murder. In that case, incidentally, I think we disproportionately stop whites too much and minorities too little.”

    “…but we should.”

  18. next up, The Drop and Give Me Twenty Bill. When his soldiers in blue are inspecting the populace for malcontents, they will be able to order mere civilians* to drop and give twenty push ups as a health check up. Those who can’t perform the simple exercise would then be fined and face stiffer penalties if they don’t visit a dietician and join a gym to get in shape.

    * Bloomberg declared them his army — no longer civilians with equal culpability under civil law, as if that was anything but a legal fiction, anyway.

  19. I thought New Orleans was my favorite city to hate, but by god, NYC has overtaken them by a long shot.

  20. Meanwhile, in other news of the authoritarian nanny state:

    State Alcoholic Beverage Control officials are reviewing the arrest of a University of Virginia student who bought bottled water and tried to flee agents cracking down on underage alcohol possession.

    Prosecutors dropped felony charges Thursday against 20-year-old Elizabeth Daly. The charges included two counts of assaulting a law enforcement officer and one count of eluding police.

    That’s some good reportin’, WaPo. Pulitzer material.

    That girl should thank her lucky stars; if that had happened in Kern County, California, she’d be dead now.

  21. Reason, talk me out of a terrible idea: I am thinking of picking up Amanda Marcotte’s book “It’s a Jungle Out there: A Feminist Survival Guide to Hostile Environments” and then posting chapter by chapter reviews here.

    This is probably a horrible idea for my mental health. Please, convince me not to do this.

    1. You know, Goldie, it would be much more satisfying, and safer overall, to just hire a dominatrix who knows how to keep things
      “safe and sane” to oversee part in your extreme pain and humiliation fantasies.

      Your use of Marcotte, while providing a thrill from the physical and mental pain, is too dangerous and I fear will eventually lead to your untimely death.

    2. It may cause some other sadistic fuck to post a review of a Lindy West book.

    3. I am thinking of picking up Amanda Marcotte’s book

      Are you borrowing it from a library? Why would you create a financial incentive for her to publish more books?

      If you find a mobi file of it, shoot me a copy and we’ll ebert and roper the shit out of it.

      1. Of course a library. I would not give her a dime. I’ll look for that mobi file though

    4. I want you to do this so badly.

      1. You’re a horrible person for hoping that AuH20 goes into a catatonic state from which he will never recover

        1. I think it will be hilarious.

    5. Don’t do it.

      Well, I did my part.

  22. This is probably a horrible idea for my mental health.

    What makes you think we give a shit about your mental health?

  23. This is why I call reason a cosmotarian magazine. There are MANY reasons why they would be more likely to find a gun on a white than a black. Might have something to do with the fact that so many blacks think acting like ganstas and disrespecting people is proof of manhood. I used to live in New York, I’ve seen this problem myself. They regularly yell profanities at each other, sexually harrass each other(and white women), and, occasionally, disrespect the police themselves. I’m not saying there aren’t whites who act like this, I’m saying I’ve only seen a few, I’ve seen hundreds of instances of blacks doing it. But cosmotarians, few of whom have actually lived among blacks, automatically accept the liberal explanation. Let’s apply that logic to other things. Blacks make less than whites? CAPITALISM IS RACIS’!

    1. It’s hilarious. Throughout his various incarnations, American has claimed to be from the Bay Area, Alabama, New York City, and am I missing any others? I think he also claimed to have lived in Japan too. And before you go in any further, I’ve lived in South Central LA for two years, so don’t tell me I have no experience living near black people and don’t tell me my eyes were lying to me when I saw cops racially profile blacks and Hispanics

      1. American has claimed to be from the Bay Area, Alabama, New York City, and am I missing any others?

        Don’t you see? He is a composite being created by the collective consciousness of “America”.

        Like Captain Planet, but for mouth-breathing inbred racists.

        1. It all makes sense as long as you assume he is a composite of the worst things about America. And that’s not much of a stretch

          1. Is he summoned by 5 children with rings personifying different vices like Ignorance and Hatred? And instead of originating from all corners of the globe, are these kids all incestuously related and suffer mental retardation from a combination of inbreeding and fetal alcohol syndrome?

            I’m guessing “yes”.

            1. Is he summoned by 5 children with rings personifying different vices like Ignorance and Hatred?

              Our world is in peril! Liberty, the spirit of America, can no longer stand the destruction of this once great land by the immigrant hordes. She sends five magic rings to five special young people, to watch over the nation and do battle with the darkies.

              From the Bay Area: Wheeler, with the power of racism.

              From Alabama: Minka, with the power of trailer parks.

              From New York: Gi, with the power of ignorance.

              From Texas: Ma Ti, with the power of LARGE BLOCKS OF TEXT!

              From Chicago: Kwame, with the power of Reading VDare

              When their powers combine, none of us are safe.

              1. Kwame, with the power of Reading VDare

                That’s a Zen koan worth of 30 years of intense ascetic meditation.

              2. Has American tried to pass off as a non-white yet?

                If not, he’s slacking.

                1. The closest he’ll ever get to masquerading as non-white is when he talks about what his “Asian” girlfriend thinks, by which, he means his regular visits to a 30-something Korean woman at his local Rub ‘n Tug.

                2. I don’t think he’s tried to pass off as non-white yet, but he has claimed at times to have an Asian girlfriend (though in most incarnations he claims to be a single PUA) and has claimed at times to be Jewish. Both of which are odd, as in his earliest incarnations, he said that both groups secretly hated White Christian America

                  1. It’s times like this that I miss Herc.

                    1. It certainly isn’t evidence for it, but having an Asian girlfriend is in no way evidence against racism toward blacks and Hispanics.

                    2. That’s completely true, but as I said, in his earliest handles, he expressed the opinion that Asians secretly hated white people, so I found it odd when he suddenly started singing the praises of Japan and claiming to have an Asian girlfriend.

              3. If only he would get the disappearing railroad blues. Yeah, you guys got THAT song stuck in my head. Bastards.

        2. Some people actually travel or move to other cities and countries.

    2. They regularly yell profanities at each other, sexually harrass each other (and white women)

      OH NO! We must don our white robes and ride up to New York City to protect the virtue of delicate White womanhood!

      *sigh* Once again, it’s time to sing-a-long with me, everyone!

      Some Libertarian folk’ll never fuck a sheep while high on meth; but then again some folk’ll./Like NK the Slack-Jawed Yokel(tarian)!

      1. You see, blacks sexually harass whites and other blacks, but not Asians or Latinos.

        Which is both totally true and really important.

        DUH!

          1. He looks traumatized.

      2. Dude’s not a libertarian. From his writing it’s pretty clear that he’s a straight up national socialist.

    3. You know, I’m pretty confident that in America a larger percentage of blacks than whites or Asians act like gangstas.

      Here’s the problem: if they are disproportionately likely to act like gangstas, then the ability to infer criminality from “gangstaness” is weakened.

      So if one truly is using a purely rational calculus based on the behavior, dress, etc of a passerby, search rates should remain stable, as the logical response is to give looking gangsta less weight for black people.

      Of course this is likely not the case when someone is being stupid and/or racist and just offering up this excuse as an ex post facto rationalization.

      1. That’s nonsense! All overweight White men, with giant beards, who wear jeans and white t-shirts while riding their Harleys are 1-Percenter meth dealers.

        It’s proven statistical fact.

        1. 1% of all income earners or 1% of all income-earning meth dealers?

    4. Fuck off, hayseed.

  24. I’m not trying to justify stop-and-frisk, it is obviously unconstitutional, but to conclude that it’s “racial profiling,” just because whites are more likely to have a gun when stopped is liberal claptrap and I can’t believe reason is repeating it. There are MANY reasons why. Might it be that blacks are more likely to act like or dress like criminals even when they are not than whites?

    1. They’re looking for weapons and drugs. So yes, it is (weak) evidence for racial profiling.

    2. Might it be that blacks are more likely to act like or dress like criminals even when they are not than whites?

      What, pray tell, does a “criminal” dress like? Do they wear a domino mask and a shirt with alternating white and black horizontal stripes? Oh, do they also clutch a burlap sack with a dollar sign scrawled on the side?

      1. Ski masks.

        1. Wait, is that why I keep getting stopped? I’m just waiting for my chance to break into the world of vigilante justice, is that so wrong?

      2. What, pray tell, does a “criminal” dress like? Do they wear a domino mask and a shirt with alternating white and black horizontal stripes?

        Conversation from a little while back with my nephew.

        Me: Why do you have Boone dressed in a black and white shirt and skinny jeans. He looks like a cross between a hipster and a beatnik.

        He: We’re coming up on Bitter Springs. He gets really emo up there.

        1. That’s hilarious.

          I hope he didn’t take his beret off though…

    3. What exactly is “dressing like a criminal”? Whatever it is, it obviously isn’t a very good predictor of criminality. Also read Thane-kins post. When you’re stopping people, the vast majority of whom are not doing anything criminal, a disproportionate number of whom are black or Hispanic, and among those stopped, blacks and Hispanics are less likely to be doing something criminal, then there’s a pretty good chance that there’s racial profiling, or at a minimum, that the criteria (if any even exist) are racially biased. Some people are racist, and there’s no reason to think cops are exempt (in fact I’d say that you could make an argument it’s a profession that racist people would be more drawn to).

      Just because liberals cry racism over everything doesn’t mean they’re aren’t actual instances where they’re correct

      1. I doubt it. Blacks are, overall, more likely to act like gangsters in everyday life than whites. More likely to yell at each other, more likely to threaten each other. I live in the South and I have seen it myself. These behaviors will lead more suspicion from the cops. Again, not justifying stop and frisk, but the evidence that it is “racist” is simply not there.

        1. NK
          Might have something to do with the fact that so many blacks think acting like ganstas and disrespecting people is proof of manhood. I used to live in New York, I’ve seen this problem myself. They regularly yell profanities at each other, sexually harrass each other(and white women), and, occasionally, disrespect the police themselves.

          Blacks are, overall, more likely to act like gangsters in everyday life than whites. More likely to yell at each other, more likely to threaten each other. I live in the South and I have seen it myself.

          You know, I analyze language for a living. Can’t you just stick with one forum handle (and claimed place-of-origin) and be done with it?

          1. I guess he thought that if he left out the “white women” part we wouldn’t realize it was him. He was wrong, because he failed to realize that not everyone is as stupid as he is.

            1. sez the wiki:

              A study done by the Stanford Graduate School of Business in 2004, found that NHL fans in America were the most educated and affluent of the four major leagues. They were also found to be substantially more computer literate than the other fans… According to Reuters in 2010, the largest demographic of NHL fans was highly sought after group males aged 18?34, who were also shown to be more “tech savvy” than most fans.

              You know what other attribute is overwhelmingly shared by NHL fans?

              1. What?

          2. I once thought of helping the Reasonable team by lending them my NLP experience, but I’m sour on them these days.

            1. roflmfao

        2. “More likely to yell at each other, more likely to threaten each other. I live in the South and I have seen it myself. These behaviors will lead more suspicion from the cops.”

          And your evidence that cops tend to stop and frisk people for these behaviors, and not other reasons is … (and since when is yelling at someone “acting like a gangster” or worthy of being stopped by police)? And the fact that the offender rates among people who are stopped and frisked are lower among blacks than whites indicates that your theory is incorrect and that these behaviors, even if they are the cause of stop and frisks, are not indicative of criminal behavior.

          Oh, and American, I see you’re back to claiming your from the South – Alabama or a different state this time?

    4. I keep coming back to our freedoms in our America.
      Because I wear baggie clothing I am officially a suspect ?? wow !!!

      So how should I dress to make sure I am not targeted???? So after a day in the office in a $400.00 suit and I chose to go home and change into my casual cloths (baggy jeans etc)I must accept being profiled since my cloths defines me as a criminal…. Sooooooo What about my freedoms and rights?

  25. This is Bloomberg’s rationale:

    “Eighty seven percent of all stops last year were for blacks or latinos, who constituted 90 percent of murder suspects, according to city stats. Only nine percent of stops were for white people, who made up 7 percent of all murder suspects.”

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/l…..oJ36auG0HM

    1. He might have a point, if we were talking about arrests for murder based on evidence. We’re talking about stop and frisks with no probable cause or reasonable suspicion, the vast majority of which reveal no criminal wrongdoing by the person being stopped. And among those stopped, whites are more likely to be found doing something criminal at the moment.

      In any case, at this point, you (and Bloomberg) aren’t even arguing that it’s not racial profiling, just that it’s justifiably so

    2. So does that mean I have a 45 percent chance of committing a murder or just being a suspect?

      Or, and this is just a “ca-razzzy” guess, but might there be other factors which are more predictive?

      1. No, 100%. You mixed folk have unstable genes.

  26. For those who wonder how the hell the people of New York elected Bloomberg, read up on the crown Heights Pogrom. It will be interesting to see what happens next election.

    1. You’re right in that Crown Heights helped lead to Giuliani’s victory and that before he became an Independent, Bloomberg ran and was first elected as an Law-and-Order type Republican.

      1. I would agree that it helped Giuliani. I’m still not buying that it’s the reason Bloomberg is in office today

        1. Of course, it’s not the sole reason. But people tend to forget that Bloomberg “mysteriously” became a Republican in the aftermath of 9/11 and his Law and Order stance played well with the NYC voters during that time.

          1. True. Although, as you imply, I’d say that by late 2001 9/11 itself was a much bigger factor than the 1991 riots in terms of how well a Law and Order stance played with the public

    2. A riot in 1991 is the reason Bloomberg is the mayor two decades later?

      1. In that the riot helped break 15 years of Democrat hegemony in the office, yes.

        1. As I said, I agree it helped Giuliani. Not so sure about Bloomberg, especially since I don’t think anyone really thought that Bloomberg’s switch the Republican party suddenly meant he was a doctrinaire conservative

  27. Enough of the rock throwing. I thought the name of this rag was ‘Reason’ not ‘Reaction’. Stop and Frisk is a bureaucrat’s reaction to a crime problem. And cops are a form of bureaucrat with a shitty job. And we all know it certainly doesn’t solve the problem. So let’s brainstorm solutions to the problem. Drug legalization, concealed carry, root family causes etc etc. On the other hand, perhaps New Yorkers should just rot in their own hell.

    1. You started off so well then ended on such a familiar note.

      Enough with the guns and nasty talk. Here’s a true solution. What about mutual respect and a measure of understanding?
      “New Yorkers should just rot in their own hell”, come on we all should be better than that.

    2. You’ve been drinking. Which is OK, but you ain’t making a lick of sense, boy.

    3. I was just kidding about the rot in hell part. Chicago is Gomorrah.

  28. Until that day when one of these public officials witness their child being stopped and manhandled by the police and placed in that stance for a search of their person none of you will understand how degrading and disrespectful this is to a person.

    2011 I saw a police stop and frisk a man who had his 7 yr old child with him, pulling away that child from his father in the process. Does anyone understand the damage this will do to our next generation.

    As a parent and a lawyer I will say it is sickening when our Mayor who stole a third term (I voted for him)by removing term limits and then putting it back once he was re-elected shows indifference to the people who got him back in office. A man who finally showed his true colors of his disdain to a certain sect of our large city.

    I am taking his words personally knowing fully well he will never understand the true NYC. Shame on us all for allowing him to scare us from doing the right thing.

    1. 2011 I saw a police stop and frisk a man who had his 7 yr old child with him, pulling away that child from his father in the process. Does anyone understand the damage this will do to our next generation.

      I do. It normalizes it. The next generation will say, “Hey, I grew up with this, and I turned out ok, so… what’s the big deal? Hail DEAR LEADER! I will promise to redouble my efforts in the salt mines so great leader can make for glorious revolution!”

      1. I think it depends on what his dad says to him after.

  29. I still find it astonishing NYC consents to this kind of illegal behavior.

    They had this police in London, England a while back and had to stop because a) media backlash and b) a MAJOR rise in violence against the Poh-leese.

    But then again, those folks in Boston seemed totally fine with being marched out of their homes at gun point, without warrants, by tacti-cool weekend warriors in the name of ‘public safety’.

    Is this the kind of America people up there want?

  30. http://www.manhattan-institute…..tm?id=9221
    “The Center for Constitutional Rights and the elite law firm of Covington & Burling, the attorneys in Floyd, faced an inconvenient truth: The stop rate for blacks is actually lower than their violent crime rate would predict.

    Blacks, who constitute 23% of the city’s population, committed 66% of all violent crimes and 73% of all shootings in 2011, according to victims and witnesses, but they were only 53% of all stop subjects.

    Whites, who constitute 35% of the city’s population, made up 9% of all stops in 2011, though they committed only 5.5% of all violent crimes and 2.5% of all shootings.”

    1. You’re really determined to fuck up the narrative, posting all these inconvenient facts, aren’t you?

  31. I think most whites that were stopped and frisked in NYC were chasing Bloomberg while waving a handgun.

    IOW, heroes.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.