Trump proposes nationwide 'stop-and-frisk' policing policy

[heatcharger]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/donald-trump-stop-and-frisk-228486

In an attempt to court black voters, Trump has called for the use of 'stop-and-frisk' around the country as a means to combat violent crime in America's inner cities.

If you are interested in the effectiveness of this policing practice, I highly suggest reading this report: http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/app/uploads/2015/09/the-human-impact-report.pdf

In short: The end of 'stop-and-frisk' did not increase crime. In fact, the violent crime rate has hit record lows in New York City, which is actually in contrast to the recent spikes in crime in other major cities across the country.

[Ebowed]

In an attempt to court black voters, Trump has called for the use of 'stop-and-frisk' around the country

Um?

This is the sort of thing that appeals to white people because it makes them feel safer when browns get hassled on the street.

[JA]

It looks like the entire Bill of Rights, save for the 2nd Amendment, of course, is on the ballot this election.

[Ebowed]

It looks like the entire Bill of Rights, save for the 2nd Amendment, of course, is on the ballot this election.

Nobody was exaggerating when they said Trump is a fascist, that's for sure.

[Dr. Arch]

It looks like the entire Bill of Rights, save for the 2nd Amendment, of course, is on the ballot this election.

Yep, and even that's questionable.

[KingSweden]

This out to do wonders for minority outreach

[heatcharger]

In an attempt to court black voters, Trump has called for the use of 'stop-and-frisk' around the country

Um?

This is the sort of thing that appeals to white people because it makes them feel safer when browns get hassled on the street.

He said it at a predominantly black church with black surrogates. Obviously it's to get scared white people on board, but it's disguised in black outreach.

[Green Line]

Good news.  Any police department that cares about reducing crime should be doing it.

[Ebowed]

In an attempt to court black voters, Trump has called for the use of 'stop-and-frisk' around the country

Um?

This is the sort of thing that appeals to white people because it makes them feel safer when browns get hassled on the street.

He said it at a predominantly black church with black surrogates. Obviously it's to get scared white people on board, but it's disguised in black outreach.

Right, like all of his black outreach.

[heatcharger]

Good news.  Any police department that cares about reducing crime should be doing it.

You should either read that report I linked or read this article: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/wrong-ending-stop-frisk-not-stopping-crime-article-1.2740157

In short: The end of 'stop-and-frisk' did not increase crime.

[JA]

Good news.  Any police department that cares about reducing crime should be doing it.

And anyone who cherishes the rights guaranteed to us by the Bill of Rights should abhor it.

[rafta_rafta]

It amazes me how the right wing holds such contrasting opinions when it comes to respecting authority.

On one side you have the Cliven Bundys, calls for small government, civil disobedience, arming to prevent government tyranny. On the other, they are also the biggest cheerleaders when the authorities violate crucial liberties like searching without probable cause, shooting unarmed.

It's almost as if their entire opinion of the situation is shaped by the skin colour of the bloke on the other side of the gun

[NerdyBohemian]

Didn't he say he's winning 90% of the black vote?

[Xing]

Uh... uh.... something something they're taking away our guns...

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

So let's see... that's the First Amendment gone... the Fifth Amendment gone... now the Fourth Amendment... is the Sixth really a stretch? The Eighth? Hell, let's just throw the whole thing out, who needs "constitutions" if we can have Trump?

[Yank2133]

It amazes me how the right wing holds such contrasting opinions when it comes to respecting authority.

On one side you have the Cliven Bundys, calls for small government, civil disobedience, arming to prevent government tyranny. On the other, they are also the biggest cheerleaders when the authorities violate crucial liberties like searching without probable cause, shooting unarmed.

It's almost as if their entire opinion of the situation is shaped by the skin colour of the bloke on the other side of the gun

Basically.

They are racist hypocrites. They all for protecting civil rights when it is about them, but if it is people of color getting screwed....well tough ****.

[Bismarck]

It amazes me how the right wing holds such contrasting opinions when it comes to respecting authority.

On one side you have the Cliven Bundys, calls for small government, civil disobedience, arming to prevent government tyranny. On the other, they are also the biggest cheerleaders when the authorities violate crucial liberties like searching without probable cause, shooting unarmed.

It's almost as if their entire opinion of the situation is shaped by the skin colour of the bloke on the other side of the gun

Basically.

They are racist hypocrites. They all for protecting civil rights when it is about them, but if it is people of color getting screwed....well tough ****.

Eh while some people probably fall into this category, I really don't think Gulliani tough on crime types supported Cliven Bundy. By the same token, I don't see people like Rand Paul supporting this stop and frisk policy. Only hacks (Hannity for example) or low info voters would support both, not people who really focus on issues.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

It looks like the entire Bill of Rights, save for the 2nd Amendment, of course, is on the ballot this election.

But, yet this bastard wants to do away with clean water, air and food. Trump is a evil piece of crap.

[Maxwell]

but but but I thought Trump was actually trying to appeal to black voters, as opposed to appealing to suburban white people's need to be fed racism in digestible bite sized chunks.

[Fuzzy Bear]

It amazes me how the right wing holds such contrasting opinions when it comes to respecting authority.

On one side you have the Cliven Bundys, calls for small government, civil disobedience, arming to prevent government tyranny. On the other, they are also the biggest cheerleaders when the authorities violate crucial liberties like searching without probable cause, shooting unarmed.

It's almost as if their entire opinion of the situation is shaped by the skin colour of the bloke on the other side of the gun

Basically.

They are racist hypocrites. They all for protecting civil rights when it is about them, but if it is people of color getting screwed....well tough ****.

Eh while some people probably fall into this category, I really don't think Gulliani tough on crime types supported Cliven Bundy. By the same token, I don't see people like Rand Paul supporting this stop and frisk policy. Only hacks (Hannity for example) or low info voters would support both, not people who really focus on issues.

I don't support "stop and frisk".  And I don't support Cliven Bundy and his ilk.

But the reason these policies have had support is that blacks in America commit significantly more crimes per capita than do other demographics in America.  One can argue the accuracy of stats, point out "book cooking" and "profiling" and the bias of drug laws and these issues have SOME merit, but do these issues make all of that disparity go away?

The "conversation about race" that I keep hearing about MUST include this aspect, or it is a one-sided conversation. 

[Suburbia]

It won't work. Period.

[Boston Bread]

It won't work. Period.

Agreed

[Maxwell]

There's no real evidence that stop and frisk works - and it's unconstitutional. Violent crime didn't fall much more than it did in Chicago or Los Angeles during that same period of time. It wasn't even declining much faster than it was when David Dinkins was in office - who's apparently a not tough on crime lib.