Discussion in 'The Off-topic Lounge' started by Bones Nose, Feb 11, 2020.
@Kneeblock I don't have a good argument against this guy
There isn’t one.
Maybe you shouldn't try to argue. Maybe you should get on board and try to make a change.
I think the police being concentrated in minority neighborhoods makes perfect sense with the information provided above
Here was the problem with stop and frisk, as someone who lived under it.
It didn't work. This is something that gets lost in the debates about it being racist or targeting low income neighborhoods. It was also incredibly ineffective. Crime was declining in NYC over the years it was in effect, but it had been declining for years prior and has continued to decline in the aftermath. Most New York pundits who supported the policy were forced to admit that it had no appreciable effect. And more to the point, we can see, as was widely reported at the time, that it didn't yield any investigative advantage to balance out the discriminatory nature of the policy.
1% of stops yielded weapons or drugs.
For a program to have had so much press, so much controversy, been such a clear violation of civil rights (as the courts found) and to have been generally unpopular even among some in the NYPD and then to have also been wildly ineffective is astonishing. More astonishing is how stop and frisk seems to resonate with "common sense" to people despite this repeatedly proven ineffectiveness.
The idea that cops could theoretically make anyone a suspect and stop them and search them just because they look a certain way in a certain neighborhood should on face value seem ridiculous. Even forgetting about civil liberties for a moment, there's just no way it works logically. Few people who sell drugs do so on the street. Few people who intend to shoot someone walk around armed all the time, at least in New York. It's just a fundamental misread of the way crime even happens and it was mostly designed to boost arrest numbers so the NYPD could feed off the bloated budgets it felt entitled to after 9/11 (despite the officers not having a contract for years under Bloomberg).
So when this old Bloomberg clip gets trotted out it resonates with the kind of ho hum lazy thinking that people usually apply to crime and policing. It was emblematic of the corporate managerial approach to being the mayor Bloomberg brought to everything where you come up with a dumb idea, have toadies who tell you it's great to impress you, then never care about the actual facts. In common ears, it seems to make sense, except it didn't yield results, can't be said to in any way account for the decline in crime in NYC, and was fundamentally discriminatory and unconstitutional.
Bernie won't win the primary, Biden will
Biden won't win, but mayor cheat will win
Mayor Cheat won't win the primary, Bloomberg will
Bernie will win a plurality, but the DNC will fuck him at the convention <---------‐- you are here
Bernie will win, but he'll never beat Trump
Bernie will win the popular vote but lose the electoral college
Bernie will win but the SCOTUS will fuck him
Bernie will win / this is where you will end up
To your point that 1% of frisks resulted in drugs or guns I would have to say most street lvl dealers keep the dope and guns tucked in a Bush or another spot close by. That's how it is around here and everywhere I've been.
Either way police should be patrolling those neighborhoods at a 10× higher rate than others. Profiling has always worked
But ny will have much bigger problems now with this ridiculous bail reform
Patrolling and stopping and frisking are 2 totally different things though. What Bloomberg's policies did was increase what the police could do to you, not their actual presence or visibility in areas they designated higher risk. I lived for in one high crime and worked in another. Cops drove past but mostly swarmed in groups of about 10-15 whenever one of them stopped someone. I was part of a committee that tried to work with the community affairs division of our local precinct when we had a series of thefts in the neighborhood. We asked for more beat patrols or just more involvement in events we had so people wouldn't see cops as just showing up at the worst times. The officer was apologetic, but basically told us that wasn't what the department was investing its time in. Instead they showed up to ribbon cuttings and drove around terrified most of the time and only rolled up on someone when they were 10 deep. The exception was kids who they could generally stop and frisk with impunity. And it didn't work. Profiling in general doesn't work. It's a crude instrument where the harder work of actually becoming embedded in neighborhoods and knowing what the networks are is much more effective. Profiling wastes cops time and resources when they could be spending their time actually getting enmeshed in the communities they're supposed to be keeping safe. And if anything it makes the population more suspicious of law enforcement and less likely to act in good faith during encounters. It also increases the likelihood of brutality, false arrests and fatal encounters needlessly. Cops have talked at length about how profiling is mostly useful in boosting the quantitative metrics departments rely on to show they're staying "active." Those metrics and that system of rewards (which is largely still in place) is the core of the problem with NYC policing. The job is counterintuitive to the officers doing it and harmful to the people they're supposed to be protecting and serving.
Alot of that community stuff sounds good but has it ever worked anywhere. I'm not so sure.
For community policing to work imo the police should be from the community they work in. Most cops around here live a county away and have zero interest in making connections in the hood when the majority (locally anyway) show no respect to authority figures.
That's because that's what they are taught at home. But the root of the problem is most of these criminals are either dope fiends or people who are selling the drugs to their own community's. These are the same people that glorify drug dealing and violence everyday in the music they listen to.
This isn't some socioeconomic issue. Or systematic racism. It's a lifestyle that's been embraced by the hood. Around here everybody lives with their mom or grama. They all get food stamps and they all sell drugs. Not a piece of education between them. And it's not that the system failed them they failed themselves
That may be your perception of the issue and may even be true for a large percentage of the people where you live, but again speaking from the position of a person who was in an area with elevated police involvement and thus a target of stop and frisk, the policy was a waste. The vast majority of people in the neighborhood were just trying to get through the day like anyone and the overwhelming majority were doing so within the bounds of the law. I agree with you that cops should be from the neighborhood or at least be on an extended rotation to a community, but I also agree that community policing doesn't always work. The point I was driving at in my example was that the police were deliberately disinterested in responding directly to community needs and that was because of a policy that instructed them to use tactics that treated people as targets instead of doing investigative work, street patrolling, or community involvement as viable tactics.
On the surface things often appear to be pretty cut and dried, but they seldom are. People work within whatever system they find themselves in whether they're scammers, dealers, or cops. In NYC, that system was designed to make the mayor look like he was taking a "tough on crime" approach when in reality he was just making cops jobs dumber and people's lives more intruded on by the state.
It's nearly impossible for police to investigate anything when the community doesn't cooperate.
Crime runs wild and people sit on their porch seeing it all day and do shit. White neighborhoods your ass is getting cuffed and people are showing up to court to assist in convictions.
The police have to try all kinds of new tactics to combat the "we dont talk to police" culture that's been glorified in the hood. Until parents raise their children properly, teach them respect for law enforcement and show some responsibility for their own neighborhoods I dont care how heavy handed the police are.