NYPD Commissioner admitted that cops target minorites in stop & frisk

[taft2012]

where heck did the police get the authority to preemptively stop crime?

From the same Supreme Court evidenciary rulings that decided 125 years after the Constitution was written that it was suddenly unreasonable and unconstitutional for police to search for evidence of a crime they suspected occurred. They make the rules. You're free to like some and dislike others, but they are the rules by which law enforcement operates.

And cross the line on the Constitution to stop and frisk without reason. Living in a high crime area is not a reason. and reasonable suspicion.

Enough with the strawman arguments. Nobody said it's Constitutional to frisk somone "without reason" or that living in a high crime amounts to reasonable suspicion.

And BTW How many people work on wall st.? Anyone checking the crime stats in that neighborhood? robberies, embezzlements, frauds, prostitution of all kinds, blackmail, drug abuse. Any NYPD doing any preemptive policing there?

Of course. You might want to Google that areas "Circle of Steel". It has the world's most sophisticated street camera security system.

[taft2012]

Other police have admitted to the practice. You call them names and Liars.

Then aren't you calling me a liar?

[jimnyc]

where heck did the police get the authority to preemptively stop crime?

Wow, didn't notice this until Taft replied.

This is the job of detectives and those involved in intelligence divisions. Part of their jobs are to perform investigations and prevent crimes. And yep, sometimes that is before people do a damned thing unlawful. Are you truly under the impression that police cannot, or should not, get involved in any crimes until the act is committed, that they cannot follow patterns, and cannot proactively follow leads in the hope of preventing criminal activity?

Suppose a cop sees a black man walking through a white neighborhood at 3am. You don't think he has the right, or the authority, to stop this person and investigate why he is there?

Suppose a white man is in a black neighborhood, known for drug activity. The white man has not been seen doing anything wrong at all. You don't believe the police have the right to ask that person why they may be there, and perhaps do a frisk if the answer doesn't jive? Hell, I've been in that EXACT circumstance myself, many years ago - and while I didn't like it - THEY WERE CORRECT in their actions.

[taft2012]

This is the job of detectives and those involved in intelligence divisions. Part of their jobs are to perform investigations and prevent crimes. And yep, sometimes that is before people do a damned thing unlawful. Are you truly under the impression that police cannot, or should not, get involved in any crimes until the act is committed, that they cannot follow patterns, and cannot proactively follow leads in the hope of preventing criminal activity?

Not to mention that all counter-terrorism efforts are also pro-active.

This is a reflection of Rev's belief that the USA should take no military action until attacked.