Posted on 06/16/2012 9:19:32 PM PDT by nickcarraway
June 15, 2012, 1:48 p.m. By JOHN C. FAGER During the 2000-01 school year, I taught a course about stop-and-frisk and the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution at City-As-School High School in New York City. I developed the course because I had overheard so many male students complaining about constantly being harassed by the police for no reason.
Their anger was an opportunity to quickly engage them. I asked Bob Lubetsky, the principal, to barge into the room before the class had started and crudely and rudely subject me to a stop-and-frisk.
His menacing gestures and nasty and profane tone evidenced a complete disrespect for me. As he left I looked up to see if the students were laughing at these two middle-aged white guys; instead I was confronted with a sea of waving hands.
I decided to call on every student, and their stories poured out. I especially remember one boy telling the class that he had been humiliated in front of his home. The cop ended the confrontation — what I would call a violation of the student’s constitutional rights — by saying: “You may live here, but I own these streets; I’m going to be watching you. Got it?”
From this beginning, the students learned that the Fourth Amendment protected individuals not from all searches, but from “unreasonable searches and seizures.”
We spent a couple of classes talking about the meaning of “unreasonable.” I explained that the United States Supreme Court had ruled that the police could conduct a stop-and-frisk only if they had a “reasonable suspicion” that a crime had been committed or was being committed.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
A population of subjects who are perfectly willing to let their government tell them where they can smoke, tells them how much salt or trans-fats they can consume, and limits the size of a soda container they can purchase, has no business complaining when that same government decides to stop them and shove a probe up their @sses.
What you don't understand is that this is supposed to happen to you.
Not them.
A hearty chuckle on that one. Even that he's since realized how wrong he was on that call; I somehow doubt he's any wiser nowadays. That he still seems fixated on the skin tone of the frisked clues me in. Complaints about minority frisking - if they have an affect at all - will only cause Bloomey to insist on more frisking of whites. Maybe he can just institute a "frisk everyone you come within 5 feet of" policy - call it the police officer's handshake.
They won’t tell a woman she cannot or even ought not kill her unborn baby. But she can’t buy a Double Gulp from 7/11 (even if the darn thing is mostly ice). Even if it’s other than a New Yorker buying it.
This is crying out loud stupid.
It makes all the sense in the world when you realize that New York City hasn’t been part of America in more than 100 years. For the most part, it’s basically just a place to live when you’re a stunted misfit who can’t look out for yourself.
Why did the rabid death-to-America crowd not recognize this? It could have saved NYC two downed towers.
To left-wingers, it is better to die than to be un-PC.
What- you mean Sinatra was wrong when he sang, “If I can make it there, I can make it anywhere!”;)
Frank was right: if NY allows you to make it without prohibitive permits, licenses, taxes, fees, kickbacks, inspections, and regulations, then you can make what ever it is just about anywhere.
At least he mentioned the very first level of "profiling", males.
Well said. I agree.
Cops with a God complex and nothing important to do blithely violate the constitution with impunity and everyone’s too busy watching TV to give a rat’s *ss.
Technically speaking, she would be able to purchase that Double Gulp, as the proposed ban would exempt grocery and convenience stores (like 7/11). Which really just goes to show that, on top of being oppressive nanny state BS, the proposed ban is absurd and unenforceable: Grocery stores and conveneice stores are exempt, but delis are not. So, the natural question is, what about the thousands of bodegas and other stores, on nearly every streetcorner in NYC, that contain both groceries and a deli counter (many of which are called some variation of “_______ Deli & Grocery”)??
From this beginning, the students learned that the Fourth Amendment protected individuals not from all searches, but from “unreasonable searches and seizures.”
It is unclear to me how some one is going to decide if it is reasonable or not.
I believe the sensible thing is that a cop can search with out a warrant on the same grounds as any private citizen, if they catch them in the act or if there are witnesses on the spot and that would involve a frisk in the act of arrest.
If the cop does not intend to arrest some one until after the search then he should have to have a warrant to search.
The 4th amendment is a law that say the cops do not own the street.
The difference is simple. The smoking ban, transfat ban, etc are all terrible, terrible policies, but are likely Constitutional (states and localities have broad discretion to enact laws & regulations, even terrible ones). A policy of detaining and searching (and make no mistake, a frisk is a search) people without a warrant or probable cause is clearly unconstitutional.
The law against perjury [lying under oath] is a good example: When Bill Clinton did it or one of their allies do it. no big deal. When Zimmerman's wife is alleged to do it, a big deal.
The difference? Bill Clinton and other Democrats are their friends.Zimmerman and his wife, though they served them faithfully in the past, have, due to political reasons, have become their enemy. Ditto Zimmerman's father and mother in both aspects.
To the Left, only the cause matters. Something that their servants, disciples, and indentured slaves will soon learn when it it is too late, the hard way. En-route to the slaughter.
But, they are a race-hustler's dream.
I asked the maitre'd of a local hotel (who happened to be a black man) why the streets in our neighborhood were barricaded off this morning. It turns out there wlll be a "peaceful protest" on 5th Ave after a prayer service at a Harlem church this morning.
The beginning of a long, hot summer, or just another photo-op for Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson?
Nonsense.
I withheld my original thoughts and toned down my response; then I re-read your post. It's a laugh. You, who are clearly perfectly fit and able to look out for yourself in whatever torpid backwater you call home, are invited to come and show us here in New York City how to be fit and able to "look after ourselves." Yeah, you'll come, won't you?
lol!
What makes it all the more funny/sad is that said backwater is New Jersey
NYC has population that's 25% black. Stop and frisk - coupled with the fact that most New Yorkers don't drive or own cars - is probably the major reason why its crime rate is below that of most cities with comparable (in % terms) black populations. End stop and frisk, and NYC's crime rate skyrockets.
Backwater or not, NJ's (2nd place) median household income is $15K higher than NY's (15th place).
I’m sure that’s not a coincidence.
Even if that is the case, the success of the program doesn't make it constitutional. An unconstitutional search is an unconstitutional search even if the search turns up contraband.
Good point & agreed!
I have no sympathy for the people of New York in this or many other regards. They wanted an intrusive nanny state, they should Not come to us looking for protection from the monster they created.
The minority that voted for liberty there should just vote again this time with their feet.
“Even if that is the case, the success of the program doesn’t make it constitutional. An unconstitutional search is an unconstitutional search even if the search turns up contraband.”
Contrary to what this teacher is teaching theses kids, the 4th ammedment of the Federal Constitution was intended to help protect us from the Federal Government. Not the New York City, or State Government.
The People of New York need to either learn to live with their creation both in-terms of intrusive nanny-state and entitlement/criminal culture, or they need wake up and change it.
Their problem only becomes our problem when New York ceases to be a City & state of Law rather than men. Until then they will not stop making messes for themselves until they are forced to confront & live with that mess. If they Really do not like it, they need to change the way they vote, both with their feet(as individuals) as with their ballot.
New York City has been using stop-and-frisk in order to make up for its unconstitutional restrictions on 2nd Amendment rights. Until those restrictions are repealed, stop-and-frisk keeps crime low.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.