APP - Stop and frisk:What are the benefits vs drawbacks?

Yoda said:
Im not going to argue the constitutionality of stop and frisk, im not sure I even like it. People cant have their cake and eat it too. You cant expect security, if you dont want to allow the tools to be used.
Prevention is what saves lives, not arrests after the fact. People have to decide whether they want the tools used to enhance prevention or not. Thats what stop and frisk is about, prevention and I realize the problems that go along with it.
Click to expand...

it would also prevent crime if the police were allowed to enter your home and search it, where do you draw the line...
 
Don Quixote said:
it would also prevent crime if the police were allowed to enter your home and search it, where do you draw the line...
Click to expand...

Police entering your home for no reason except to go looking around is Fishing and will never be allowed.

Stop and frisk is different in the sense the police have to have reason to believe. Now dont jump me Im not defending the practice here, im pointing out the difference.
One is they actually have eyes on someone, the other is a fishing expedition.
 
Yoda said:
Police entering your home for no reason except to go looking around is Fishing and will never be allowed.

Stop and frisk is different in the sense the police have to have reason to believe. Now dont jump me Im not defending the practice here, im pointing out the difference.
One is they actually have eyes on someone, the other is a fishing expedition.
Click to expand...

is 'suspicion' a vague enough term to be usable for stop and frisk?
 
Yoda said:
Police entering your home for no reason except to go looking around is Fishing and will never be allowed.

Stop and frisk is different in the sense the police have to have reason to believe. Now dont jump me Im not defending the practice here, im pointing out the difference.
One is they actually have eyes on someone, the other is a fishing expedition.
Click to expand...

sorry, i meant to add that the police could enter your home if they thought that illegal activity may be going on...

i too do not condone either activity
 
Yoda said:
Im not going to argue the constitutionality of stop and frisk, im not sure I even like it. People cant have their cake and eat it too. You cant expect security, if you dont want to allow the tools to be used.
Prevention is what saves lives, not arrests after the fact. People have to decide whether they want the tools used to enhance prevention or not. Thats what stop and frisk is about, prevention and I realize the problems that go along with it.
Click to expand...

Nope, not APP. Knock it off.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rune said:
We have a constitution you fucking asshole.
You are the new Official Village Idiot. USAFreedom, you are hereby relieved of idiot duty for the forseeable future.
Click to expand...

So I'm not required to make sure you don't hurt yourself, for the moment? :good4u:
<this is way to easy>
 
Don Quixote said:
it would also prevent crime if the police were allowed to enter your home and search it, where do you draw the line...
Click to expand...

But the statistics for this showed that it was 4% effective with a whopping 96% of people were innocent during these stop and frisk searches.
 
Bill, you missed where USF quoted me. I didn't realize it was APP and before I could delete it he had already quoted me. In retrospect I should have reported myself.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
is 'suspicion' a vague enough term to be usable for stop and frisk?
Click to expand...

Depends on the circumstances, for example, youre on patrol and it comes over to look out for an indvidual that looks like such and such dressed like such and such. There could be many that look and are dressed similar, cops dont have crystal balls in their patrol cars. You see someone that reasonably matchs the description, you stop and frisk if you believe thats necessary.
To determine whether or not that is the individual you have to STOP them and ask them questions, there is NO other way.
 
Rune said:
Bill, you missed where USF quoted me. I didn't realize it was APP and before I could delete it he had already quoted me. In retrospect I should have reported myself.
Click to expand...

USF is on my ignore, but whatever. It's an edit and it's handled. Just don't make it a habit.
 
Yoda said:
Depends on the circumstances, for example, youre on patrol and it comes over to look out for an indvidual that looks like such and such dressed like such and such. There could be many that look and are dressed similar, cops dont have crystal balls in their patrol cars. You see someone that reasonably matchs the description, you stop and frisk if you believe thats necessary.
To determine whether or not that is the individual you have to STOP them and ask them questions, there is NO other way.
Click to expand...

That doesn't give them the right to frisk you.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Both you and Rune know that the matter wasn't about him violating an APP rule and was instead him making a reference he shouldn't have made.
Click to expand...

You sure sound like you don't want to be a part of APP...Stick to the thread topic and take your pettiness to the WZ.
 
The problem really stems from what people will ALLOW to be done.
Just because the Police say they're going to frisk you, doesn't mean you have to agree.
You have the legal right to say that you're not agreeing to a frisk.
If they decide to do it anyway, then they've just violated law interpretation that has been upheld by the SCOTUS.
Where people get into trouble is they:
A - either agree or don't say anything and silence to the request is not recognized as a refusal
or
B - They resist the illegal search and get them selves arrested for resisting and at that point they have a legal right to search you

To many people get confused on what the Police can do, what they might do, and what they will do.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
B - They resist the illegal search and get them selves arrested for resisting and at that point they have a legal right to search you

To many people get confused on what the Police can do, what they might do, and what they will do.
Click to expand...

does a person not have a right to resist illegal assault from another person, or do they have a duty to submit because the person is wearing a badge?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
does a person not have a right to resist illegal assault from another person, or do they have a duty to submit because the person is wearing a badge?
Click to expand...

Sure you do and then he has the right to arrest you and the judge has the right to assign you jail time and/or a fine.

The day you physically resist a search, you send everyone the news article; because you talk big, but you really aren't doing anything you suggest others to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top