Hey white people - this is sending a wrong message

[The True Adonis]

In my opinion, it becomes more of a problem if you saw a black man in a business suit walking out of a Morgan Stanley building and decided to frisk him just because he's black.

Does that happen very often? 

[Hulkotron]

Sept 9, 2014....Cswol cruising in style

Seems to have abandoned his diet

[SF1900]

Does that happen very often?  

Did I say it did?

I said, "IF........" Then it would be a problem. In fact, most (I can never say ALL) black men like this do not get stopped and frisked.

[Lustral]

The issue is that just because someone may look like a thug it does not mean they are. I mean, where do you draw the line? Its unreasonable to frisk everyone who looks like they would commit a crime.

Try working security some time. When I was younger I did security in clubs and supermarkets. Club didn't have to do profiling, more based on how drunk/high they were and if they caused trouble before.

In a supermarket it was people in flecky tracksuits, heroin addicts and travellers you always had to watch for. Travellers were the worst - the girls would do all these ridiculous diversion moves around cosmetics aisle. I just stood there, knew they wanted to steal fake tan etc. They would leave in a huff. Caught them at least 5 times trying to walk out full trollies with all sorts - from shampoos and nappies to roast chickens and pizza.

Junkies would try steal handbags or any high value item they could sell on like razor blades etc. They were just pathetic.

Sure, the odd middle aged man in a suit might have walked off with a bottle of whiskey and I didn't know about it (I caught one guy walking out with €300 of whiskey) but you would be an idiot not to profile. Certain groups commit more crimes, deal with it.

[The True Adonis]

Did I say it did?

I said, "IF........" Then it would be a problem. In fact, most (I can never say ALL) black men like this do not get stopped and frisked.

Why even float the supposition if it rarely or almost never happens?

[SF1900]

Try working security some time. When I was younger I did security in clubs and supermarkets. Club didn't have to do profiling, more based on how drunk/high they were and if they caused trouble before.

In a supermarket it was people in flecky tracksuits, heroin addicts and travellers you always had to watch for. Travellers were the worst - the girls would do all these ridiculous diversion moves around cosmetics aisle. I just stood there, knew they wanted to steal fake tan etc. They would leave in a huff. Caught them at least 5 times trying to walk out full trollies with all sorts - from shampoos and nappies to roast chickens and pizza.

Junkies would try steal handbags or any high value item they could sell on like razor blades etc. They were just pathetic.

Sure, the odd middle aged man in a suit might have walked off with a bottle of whiskey and I didn't know about it (I caught one guy walking out with €300 of whiskey) but you would be an idiot not to profile. Certain groups commit more crimes, deal with it.

Did I ever say that certain groups did not commit more crimes? No, I did not. Deal with it.

What I said is that how would one implement a policy for "stop and frisk" procedures. Second, does "stop and frisk" even reduce crime? Is there any evidence to suggest this? I am well aware that certain groups commit more crime than other groups. The question is how to reduce that statistic.

[SF1900]

Why even float the supposition if it rarely or almost never happens?

Because even if it happened ONCE, which I am sure it has, I am in a position to bring it up. Whether you like it or not.

When people are discussing, debating or implementing any policy, its quite common to bring up assumptions, even if they have not occurred in real life.

[The True Adonis]

Because even if it happened ONCE, which I am sure it has, I am in a position to bring it up. Whether you like it or not.

When people are discussing, debating or implementing any policy, its quite common to bring up assumptions, even if they have not occurred in real life.

So what.  What does that have to do with the broader picture?

[The True Adonis]

Did I ever say that certain groups did not commit more crimes? No, I did not. Deal with it.

What I said is that how would one implement a policy for "stop and frisk" procedures. Second, does "stop and frisk" even reduce crime? Is there any evidence to suggest this? I am well aware that certain groups commit more crime than other groups. The question is how to reduce that statistic.

Just curious, how do you think a Terry Stop (stop and frisk) works? 

[SF1900]

So what.  What does that have to do with the broader picture?

Um, its all about the broader picture and thinking about how one variable may affect another variable, even in its broader context. You're always thinking about distal and proximal variables when discussing any matter.

I have never been in a meeting where people didn't do this.

[Lustral]

Did I ever say that certain groups did not commit more crimes? No, I did not. Deal with it.

What I said is that how would one implement a policy for "stop and frisk" procedures. Second, does "stop and frisk" even reduce crime? Is there any evidence to suggest this? I am well aware that certain groups commit more crime than other groups. The question is how to reduce that statistic.

OK you said this

The issue is that just because someone may look like a thug it does not mean they are. I mean, where do you draw the line? Its unreasonable to frisk everyone who looks like they would commit a crime.

It is unreasonable to assume they all are going to be criminals, yes, but from looking at someone in a given context you can make an informed decision that they are far more likely to be a criminal than another grouping.

If there is a 5% crime rate among the average population but a 40% crime rate in a specific grouping (it is close to this for travellers and that is underestimating it) you have to focus more attention on these people when you see them. Whether that means following them with a cctv camera, stopping and searching them or whatever, it is a logical action based on experience and statistical probability.

Whether or not it reduces crime is debatable. Crime is a way of life for some people. Travellers have a nomadic existence and are peripheral to normal society so they live by different rules. That may sound ridiculous/outrageous but fighting for money, theft, welfare fraud, organised theft are all widespread with travellers. I mean there are Irish travellers famous for stealing rhino horns around the world and selling to Chinese underground just as they steal copper wires and scrap metal here.

If you had a shop and they came in you'd watch them more than the sweet old lady wheeling around her bag.

[Archer77]

Um, its all about the broader picture and thinking about how one variable may affect another variable, even in its broader context. You're always thinking about distal and proximal variables when discussing any matter.

I have never been in a meeting where people didn't do this.

The problem is by titling a video Hey White People they are making the same kinds of behavioral and attitude  generalizations about all white people they complain are happening to blacks  Of course they will never realize how foolish and hypocritical this makes them look.

[Lustral]

The problem is by titling a video Hey White People they are making the same kinds of behavioral and attitude  generalizations about all white people they complain are happening to blacks  Of course they will never realize how foolish and hypocritical this makes them look.

Only white people can be racist, only men can be sexist and only straights can be bigoted.

The BBC have censored the word girl (yes girl, not getbig filter) and bossy in relation to women. Have people gone fucking insane?

[Archer77]

Only white people can be racist, only men can be sexist and only straights can be bigoted.

The BBC have censored the word girl (yes girl, not getbig filter) and bossy in relation to women. Have people gone fucking insane?

You're right.  I totally forgot.  We now live in a world were racial paranoia is so pervasive 1,400 girls being raped is preferable to doing the right thing.  

[Voice of Doom]

Stop and Frisk laws are unconstitutional no matter what color your skin is.

[24KT]

Stop and Frisk laws are unconstitutional no matter what color your skin is.

^^^^^ This

[WillGrant]

LMAO!!

http://instagram.com/p/sxkQ7rufnb/?modal=true

click there, then click on the video.

Da Fuq 

[Shockwave]

Then your opinion is wrong. Things actually do need to be explicitly stated otherwise people start inferring. Then they infer wrongly, like you.

It's very simple:

Black people are stopped and searched more because they live in high crime neighbourhoods. You want the police patrolling high crime neighbourhoods - they should be trying to prevent crimes after all - so they will stop and search more black people. It doesn't mean they targeted all the black people , just the people that could possibly be committing, or about to commit, a crime. They will stop a small percentage of the people they observe but they will be black.

Therefore, you end up with a statistic that black people are stopped and searched more: they live in the highest crime areas. Police need to be stopping and searching people in those areas to prevent serious, violent crimes.

Anyway, it's not worth trying to have a serious discussion here so I will leave this alone now and go back to Bar Refaeli's anus, Joon's newest gimmick, much Radu about nothing.

A guy on the poli board actually argued the spirit of the law was racist because

A.they dont stop and frisk every race evenly

And

B.its causing more black people to get caught commiting smaller time crimes, getting picked up for warrants, pot, etc.... and since theyre getting more black people than whites, its racist.

I still dont understand... theyre using statistics, coldnhard facts, to determine where to focus their efforts, and its racist because its succeeding in finding criminals....