Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: New York Democrats Want to Ban Police From Describing Suspects By Race, Sex, or Age

  1. #1
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    63,393

    New York Democrats Want to Ban Police From Describing Suspects By Race, Sex, or Age

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013...ce-sex-or-age/

    Posted by Gateway Guest Blogger on Wednesday, June 19, 2013, 8:01 PM

    Guest Post by Mara Zebest
    New York Dems want to pass a bill that would limit a description of a suspect to identify suspects essentially by the clothes they wear only. Truly mind-numbing stupidity.
    Imagine if you are a victim of a crime and the police are not allowed to use information describing the suspect to indicate whether the criminal is male or female, young or old, black, white, or whatever identifying information to help narrow down the search. The NYPD are fighting back with a new ad depicting a police officer with a blindfold.
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013...ce-sex-or-age/



    NYPD fights to fight crime with new ad, as Council tries to ban using ‘race, gender, or age’ to ID suspects

    Cops might as well wear blindfolds if the City Council passes a bill that would let them use little more than the color of a suspect’s clothing in descriptions — or risk being sued for profiling, according to this provocative new ad (pictured) from the NYPD captains union.
    The ad asks, “How effective is a police officer with a blindfold on?”


    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/c...D6q3MTmPtu6xfI

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,833
    "New York Democrats" - enough said.
    #Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !

  3. #3
    Member mikenold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    WNY
    Posts
    7,594
    I can hear the dispatcher now: "You are looking for a person seen leaving the scene of a murder, that's all we have for now"! Duh! Maybe they should just fire all dispatchers and just let the police ride around and hope they happen to see a crime and make an arrest. In fact just fire all the police and just allow crime to happen. Too bad for the victims. Of course we really can't identify the victims by race, gender, or age either. These legislators are idiotic to put it mildly!
    **free is a trademark of the current U.S. government.

  4. #4
    Member nogods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,330
    There's a trend in internet scams - the scamers are purposefully mentioning Nigeria in the emails because they want to focus on the truly gullible - the ones most likely for their scam.

    Seems the right wing wacko media has the same operatives to get the minions to mindlessly regurgitate their nonsense.

    Thanks for playing guys.

    But if you actually read the legislation, you're forced to come to a different conclusion. "It's a flat out misrepresentation of the bill and everybody knows it," the legislation's co-sponsor, Councilmember Brad Lander said, referring to Richter's comments. "The bill allows police officers to use all manner of descriptive information, including skin color, height, age, in suspect descriptions. It absolutely allows it and it's a lie to say it doesn't."

    Indeed, the Community Safety Act would prohibit police from stopping someone solely based on those descriptive factors alone, and it widens the scope to include gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, immigration status, and housing status.
    http://gothamist.com/2013/06/19/post...out_bill_a.php

  5. #5
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    63,393
    Indeed, the Community Safety Act would prohibit police from stopping someone solely based on those descriptive factors alone, and it widens the scope to include gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, immigration status, and housing status.

    If what I high lighted is the goal we are missing the point then.

    If someone breaks into someone's home and there is a witness with a description of that person an officer can't stop someone who fits that description? What planet are these people on?

    So if there is a 300 pound white guy with a handle bar mustache wearing a green shirt and jeans that matches the description the police are prohibited from stopping a person that matches?

  6. #6
    Member Eat My Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    The Socialist States of Amerika
    Posts
    1,641
    it widens the scope to include gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, immigration status, and housing status.

    I am at a loss as to when any of the above factors are ever given in a suspect's description.


    "I won't live by rules that make no sense to me." - Evan Tanner 1971-2008

    Transfixus sed non Mortuus

  7. #7
    Member nogods's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,330
    Quote Originally Posted by WNYresident View Post
    If what I high lighted is the goal we are missing the point then.

    If someone breaks into someone's home and there is a witness with a description of that person an officer can't stop someone who fits that description? What planet are these people on?

    So if there is a 300 pound white guy with a handle bar mustache wearing a green shirt and jeans that matches the description the police are prohibited from stopping a person that matches?
    Correct - looking like a suspect is not reason enough to violate a person's constitutional rights.

    Many years ago the Amherst Police received a report of a young black man trying to open cars parked on the street. They question every young black man in Snyder, including the kid working at the Convenient store I was at when they cam in and disrupted my purchase of milk to grill their suspect. BS.

    Remember this: Women delivering newspapers in Torrance shot in manhunt for ex-cop

    Their car matched the description of the suspects car. Everyone owning a blue pickup was in danger of being shot by the police.

    Oh, and it cost the taxpayers 4.2 million: Women Mistakenly Shot at in Christopher Dorner Manhunt to Get $4.2M

    And Anthony Capozzi was arrested solely because he looked like the suspect. Yeah, that was some real good police work.

  8. #8
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    63,393
    What is the ratio of mistakes compared to catching the person because of the description?

    I don't think stopping someone because they fit the description of the person who just committed a crime is what the Founding Fathers were referring to as a violate a person's constitutional rights.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,833
    Look - when it comes to a "lawyers" point of view - he's always looking at a potential client!

    We all have to remember - this is just in front of a intensely important election cycle. They understand most Americans have seen too much - have read to much - Mr.Snowdens a traitor. IRS was acting on the behest of one rough Republican. The NSA was only "Logging" phone numbers , no person was listening! ?

    If a perps running down the street - don't stop him because he just might vote Democrat !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please!!!!!!!!!!!!
    #Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. New York Democrats in hot water over slush fund
    By cheekman in forum Albany NY State budget Capital and Governor Andrew Cuomo
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 2nd, 2010, 11:13 AM

Posting Permissions

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