And so the perpetual tension continues. I think it’s better this discussion keeps alive even if sometimes it ends up in the wrong place. Because the same discussion can correct it later, as we place trust in the Lord... and that is the key, to really MEAN it again when we say “IN GOD WE TRUST.” It ain’t a pride thing unless of course we mean the elevation of God’s glory, then we can brag every bit as much as we want... on Him, that is.
What surprises me is that 90% number. That means 10% of stops resulted in a summons or arrest?.
The question is were they making up stuff, or were they legitimate summons and arrests? Because if they are legitimate, any kind of sting that arrests 1 in 10 seems like to me is a good sting.
If 1 in 10 results in an arrest or summons, is that an unreasonable search and seizure?
I believe we could do a better job with crime control if we brought back the gallows and “Old Sparky”.
No more 20 year waits for an execution. Get it done within 30 days, but allow clemency in extenuating circumstances.
One thing, I would like to see, is a limited Federal Big Brother program. Yeah, I said it. Might as well call it what it is.
Limit it to the 4 highest crime rate cities in America. Saturate the city with cameras. Maybe even use a few drones. But dramatically clean up the city’s crime in the course of 1 year.
Simultaneously run stings against the local and state officials and law enforcement. Seriously, if the crime is that bad, what’s the odds that Law Enforcement isn’t corrupt too.
Establish crime benchmarks. If not enough progress has been made, continue the program for 1 more year. Otherwise move on to another high crime city. 2 Years max.
But of course we need to either wait for a new admistration or have multiple redundant controls to keep the current admin from focusing it on tea party members. Probably both.
I would say, make it a state program, but if the state hasn’t deal with the crime by now, then let the Feds do it.
Taking away our guns. Taking away our right to self defense and going easy on druggies, dealers, rapists, murderers and thieves. This is going to end ugly. Good luck with that America. Elect a bunch of Chicago street thugs, gangstas and crooks and that’s the kind of government you’re going to get.
I would be interested in stopping the crimes of the federal government, such as Fast and Furious, the IRS, the FEC, the FCC.
Great idea disarm the police.
More proof we need the 2nd Amendment and Stand your Ground.
When I think society hits the lowest common denominator (LCM) somehow it goes even lower.
The best way to reduce crime would be to expand the definitions where citizens can use lethal force- for example, most of these stoners steal to support their drug use. If we were allowed to shoot and kill thieves, there would be both fewer thieves, and fewer stoners. Then the crime rate drops further, as the chance of the deceased becoming recidivists is 0%. Granted, it would not happen- too many state-paid defense attorneys would lose their income stream, and they are too well connected to their legislator buddies who used to be lawyers.
“New York: Muggings Return With A Vengeance”
I predict that headline in 2 Years.
While Stop and Frisk is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment, it has also clearly made the streets safe to walk.
Which introduces the age-old problem: How much Freedom are you willing to give up to achieve Security?
Not an easy question to answer, especially if you’ve been mugged.
OBTW - None of the foregoing has anything to do with race. If Stop and Frisk were somehow constitutional, stopping those who fit the profile of crooks may disproportionately (to population) fall on blacks, who commit crime disproportionately (to population). Tough.
Stop and Frisk has repeatedly been shown to be disproportionately affecting WHITES compared to their rate of either victimization or conviction. That just means that whites commit so much less crime that cops Stopping and Frisking them at most any rate is much higher than their proportion of criminal encounters.