CRE10 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Mods Please close. This thread has gone full retard This is a discussion board and members are discussing what you posted. Nothing here has gone against forum rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry1 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Mods Please close. This thread has gone full retard How so? Because two people have a disagreement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gran Torino Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Searching people simply to be searching them is a blatant violation of their rights. This couldn't be any clearer or simpler to understand. People that think this is okay are freaking crazy and probably on board with the NSA going through their phone records, taking away their guns without just cause, shutting down you iphone in a crowd and flying drones over your house 24/7. Wake up people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindfield Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 No, because they walk around acting like criminals, imulating criminals, and fitting the profile of criminals they should be watched with a greater amount of detail. I have know several people tha grew up poor, in poor areas yet did not walk around looking like a poster child for the Bloods or MS13. I can assure you the kids walking around in dockers and polo shirts are not the ones being searched. The kids walking around advertising their ass for rent with their pants down around the bottom of their butt with a colored bandana are the ones that are. If you walk around like the local drug lord dont expect to be treated like Bill Gates. SO who decides what a criminal looks like? The biggest crooks in America wear thousand dollar suits. All sorts of people wear bandanas or 'sag' it doesn't make them a criminal anymore than your gun makes you a school shooter, a thummbdrive makes you a hacker or a car makes you a wheelman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbarron06 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 According to the TN bureau of crime statistics TN had the highest rate of gun violence per capita. Sorry turn them in you are more likely than the rest to commit a crime with a gun Please site your source because according to the US gov TN is far from it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry1 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 http://www.tbi.state.tn.us/tn_crime_stats/stats_analys.shtml Is the Wikipedia file per capita I can't open it on my phone unfortunately Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medic07 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 I think we can all agree that,in NY, all common sense has gone out the window..........with similar trends following everywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry1 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Here is a more condensed version http://www.amazon.com/wiki/Crime_in_Tennessee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbarron06 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 (edited) http://www.tbi.state.tn.us/tn_crime_stats/stats_analys.shtml Is the Wikipedia file per capita I can't open it on my phone unfortunately Broken down murder per 100K and gun murders per 100K. To add despite having the lowest gun ownership rate, DC is the only "state" with double digit numbers in both murders and gun murders. Edited August 20, 2013 by redbarron06 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry1 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Broken down murder per 100K and gun murders per 100K. To add despite having the lowest gun ownership rate, DC is the only "state" with double digit numbers in both murders and gun murders. Yes I was talking violent acts with a gun per capita. After rereading dc is higher than TN, TN comes in second Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepper Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Searching people simply to be searching them is a blatant violation of their rights. This. Absolutely, unequivocally, this. Without reasonable suspicion, there is NO ability for the police to detain and frisk someone. There must be an articulable suspicion that the person may be armed, or pose a threat to the officer. I can't search someone just because I stop them either. I have to either have consent, or have something I can hang my hat on, such as baggy clothing with a suspicious lump, furtive movements, something. If someone is just standing there and their contraband is well concealed, giving away no clues, I may have to wave goodbye to them. I almost lost a dope case last week to that, but the idiot came back to my stop location (passenger in a car that was being towed/impounded), and then told me that she had drugs and paraphernalia in her purse, giving me probable cause to search it and find her marijuana, and her heroin. I thought sure as hell I'd lost all the dope in the car when she blissfully stood up and walked away, as I had no right to detain her. When she came back of her own free will, and volunteered that she left because she was scared about the dope in her bag, I almost fell over laughing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgtar15 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 What I find hilarious is the people that beotch about the government yet they have government jobs. That's RICH!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry1 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 This. Absolutely, unequivocally, this. Without reasonable suspicion, there is NO ability for the police to detain and frisk someone. There must be an articulable suspicion that the person may be armed, or pose a threat to the officer. I can't search someone just because I stop them either. I have to either have consent, or have something I can hang my hat on, such as baggy clothing with a suspicious lump, furtive movements, something. If someone is just standing there and their contraband is well concealed, giving away no clues, I may have to wave goodbye to them. I almost lost a dope case last week to that, but the idiot came back to my stop location (passenger in a car that was being towed/impounded), and then told me that she had drugs and paraphernalia in her purse, giving me probable cause to search it and find her marijuana, and her heroin. I thought sure as hell I'd lost all the dope in the car when she blissfully stood up and walked away, as I had no right to detain her. When she came back of her own free will, and volunteered that she left because she was scared about the dope in her bag, I almost fell over laughing. quite the supervillian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbarron06 Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 Here is a more condensed version http://www.amazon.com/wiki/Crime_in_Tennessee Let me let u in on a secret, theChattanooga free times press is a commie liberal anti gun rag, and what makes it worse, they quote the Tennessean and it is even worse. Even after making the alligation in the story they admit that DC was above TN in the stats. Here are some actual stats from 2010 posted in 1/11. http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state As you can see the stats tell a different story. Now I am not saying the numbers are anything to be proud of but they were not in the top with gun violence. Again DC leads the way. We can also look at these stats for any of the states and narrow down where the problem areas are. I can tell you that in TN it is in areas of Memphis, Jackson, Nashville, Chattanooga, and Knoxville (high gang population areas), I can assure you that any of the LEOs on here that are or have been in high gang areas can tell you exactlly who is in the gangs, more than likley where they rank in those gangs and which one of them is more than likley going to be packing when they see them on the street. The NYPD were not stopping granny on the way to church on Sunday morning, or tourists at the Statue of Liberty. They were in high crime areas stopping people that by reason of deducion and observation were likley canidates to be conducting violent crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepper Posted August 20, 2013 Share Posted August 20, 2013 quite the supervillian This is what bugs me more than anything in these discussions. Often, I am more concerned with people's constitutional rights than even they are. Then someone who doesn't have all the facts complain about how cops violate people's rights, it's just frustrating. A good cop will make mistakes, and will occasionally violate someone's rights. It happens. They don't want it to happen, no one does, but a good cop rides right on the edge. They go as far as they can, without taking one step too far. Sometimes the turn of a phrase can turn a consensual conversational encounter into a "stop", where the person feels like they're not free to leave, and the whole dynamic changes. Sometimes simply the number of officers, the positioning of cars, body language, all can go into the equation, and can turn a valid, consensual contact into an illegal search or detention. It's why even after learning all about this stuff, even lawyers need to see hundreds, if not thousands of practical applications of case law to know what is, and is not reasonable. Trying to pigeonhole every circumstance into black and white boxes is impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.