Donald Trump says he would implement nationwide stop and frisk policy

[Big John]

8 hours ago, wdswtr said:

So Redneck as I asked Core what common sense solution do you propose doing to solve the rampant illegal guns, murders-shootings and drug problems wrecking the inner cities?

Airedale has a valid question so I restate it, to ALL you who are against the idea come up with a better plan!

[wdswtr]

13 minutes ago, Big John said:

Airedale has a valid question so I restate it, to ALL you who are against the idea come up with a better plan!

Thats great but your quoting something I did not say.

[Big John]

I know that is why I said Airedale for some reason the quote box was your name and his quote.

 

Edited September 25, 2016 by Big John

[brownclown]

Airedale has a valid question so I restate it, to ALL you who are against the idea come up with a better plan!

I wasn't asked but if laws on books were actually enforced and these POS bangers severed full sentences the problem would go away quickly.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Core]

2 hours ago, Big John said:

Airedale has a valid question so I restate it, to ALL you who are against the idea come up with a better plan!

I don't think this is a fair defense of any argument. If I proposed that the cops have special units that do nothing but drive by and gun down anybody standing on a corner looking suspicious, gang activity would go down. But, this would be unconstitutional also.

[airedale]

Oh they have a plan alright.

Edited September 25, 2016 by airedale

[diplomat019]

If you guys support mayor bloombergs initiatives thats fine.   Why poke fun at people who dont?  My heads not in the ground because of my opinion.  Im fine with your support of bloombergs policies.  

[philoshop]

Uhhh...Bloomberg is not the mayor of NYC. De Blasio is. Carry on.

Stop and frisk was implemented under mayor Rudy Giuliani and along with the "broken windows" policy resulted in a one year reduction in homicide fatalities in the city from 2500 to 500. Those policies worked at a time when the city was desperate for a solution. It could work in Chicago and elsewhere as well if those places had any real leadership.

[diplomat019]

23 minutes ago, philoshop said:

Uhhh...Bloomberg is not the mayor of NYC. De Blasio is. Carry on.

Stop and frisk was implemented under mayor Rudy Giuliani and along with the "broken windows" policy resulted in a one year reduction in homicide fatalities in the city from 2500 to 500. Those policies worked at a time when the city was desperate for a solution. It could work in Chicago and elsewhere as well if those places had any real leadership.

Uhhhh.  One of bloombergs major accomplishments as mayor was stop and frisk.  Big john even touted his 2011 stats.  Carry on. 

[Big John]

2 hours ago, Core said:

I don't think this is a fair defense of any argument. If I proposed that the cops have special units that do nothing but drive by and gun down anybody standing on a corner looking suspicious, gang activity would go down. But, this would be unconstitutional also.

So you have no better solution! Oh and "stop and frisk" is only unconstitutional by one Federal Judge she is NOT the State Supreme Court nor the US Supreme Court.

[Core]

1 hour ago, philoshop said:

Uhhh...Bloomberg is not the mayor of NYC. De Blasio is. Carry on.

Stop and frisk was implemented under mayor Rudy Giuliani and along with the "broken windows" policy resulted in a one year reduction in homicide fatalities in the city from 2500 to 500. Those policies worked at a time when the city was desperate for a solution. It could work in Chicago and elsewhere as well if those places had any real leadership.

Which year was this exactly?

[Core]

56 minutes ago, Big John said:

So you have no better solution! Oh and "stop and frisk" is only unconstitutional by one Federal Judge she is NOT the State Supreme Court nor the US Supreme Court.

I just gave you a better solution. Gun everyone down who's standing on a street corner. The point of my solution was to show that a) Just because I may or may not have a "better" solution doesn't mean the one proposed should be done and b ) if we throw considerations of due process aside we can have a "secure" society.

Inconvenient truth is actually that despite "common sense" telling us stop and frisk would be pretty effective, the statistics show it isn't: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/21/12-years-of-data-from-new-york-city-suggest-stop-and-frisk-wasnt-that-effective/

In fact, the most surprising stat here is that when stop and frisk went way down so too did shootings and murders.

I'm surprised, too, but that's what the data says. That's the reality.

[ncountry]

I think it is a grand idea... Within a city limits .... Notices can be posted .upon entering city limits your personal freedoms are partially revoked.. if this makes everybody living within feel better ..great..  I would personally choose  not  to have my rights or person violated.. but being that I don't live in or visit many cities, it won't be my problem...

I would be absolutely livid if I was walking down the street in my local town and was stopped and frisked.. Never have anything to hide, but that's not really the point.

[LJC]

56 minutes ago, ncountry said:

I think it is a grand idea... Within a city limits .... Notices can be posted .upon entering city limits your personal freedoms are partially revoked.. if this makes everybody living within feel better ..great..  I would personally choose  not  to have my rights or person violated.. but being that I don't live in or visit many cities, it won't be my problem...

I would be absolutely livid if I was walking down the street in my local town and was stopped and frisked.. Never have anything to hide, but that's not really the point.

Yep that's something you only need to do in some parts of the inner cities . Gangs not going anywhere,  Gangs cant  shoot each other if they can't freely carry there guns on the streets  can  they . There is no other thing you can do in those places anyway . You can never stop it all either .

[Big John]

6 hours ago, Core said:

I just gave you a better solution. Gun everyone down who's standing on a street corner. The point of my solution was to show that a) Just because I may or may not have a "better" solution doesn't mean the one proposed should be done and b ) if we throw considerations of due process aside we can have a "secure" society.

Inconvenient truth is actually that despite "common sense" telling us stop and frisk would be pretty effective, the statistics show it isn't: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/21/12-years-of-data-from-new-york-city-suggest-stop-and-frisk-wasnt-that-effective/

In fact, the most surprising stat here is that when stop and frisk went way down so too did shootings and murders.

I'm surprised, too, but that's what the data says. That's the reality.

Since your idea is moronic why not go all in..........? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7GMcgL2nro

[Core]

56 minutes ago, Big John said:

Since your idea is moronic why not go all in..........? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7GMcgL2nro

Okay, you missed what an analogy is, so getting back on topic: I provided data showing that stop and frisk is not that great. Do you have contradicting data? I've provided data showing it as ineffective.

Counterpoint?

[Core]

On 9/24/2016 at 8:02 PM, Core said:

Really? I just described the terror watch list and the debate about selling guns to those on it. And guess what, it's real and millions have no problem supporting exactly what I just described.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LJC I wasn't sure you saw this response from last, since you described my description of it it as paranoid, but then in fact it is 100% real and exactly as I stated. Just wondering if you had thoughts on that after all.

[LJC]

1 hour ago, Core said:

LJC I wasn't sure you saw this response from last, since you described my description of it it as paranoid, but then in fact it is 100% real and exactly as I stated. Just wondering if you had thoughts on that after all.

Lol not enough people in government to possibly  watch 350million all they can do is store data then us it after the fact if you do something wrong. 

So your  still being  paranoid.

 

[LJC]

1 hour ago, Core said:

Okay, you missed what an analogy is, so getting back on topic: I provided data showing that stop and frisk is not that great. Do you have contradicting data? I've provided data showing it as ineffective.

Counterpoint?

So you think airports are not safer with out metal detectors. 

Really lol it  definitely makes a difference.  Just like stop and frisk in NY city 

[Core]

9 minutes ago, LJC said:

Lol not enough people in government to possibly  watch 350million all they can do is store data then us it after the fact if you do something wrong. 

So your  still being  paranoid.

 

I can see why so many think you're willfully ignorant. I described the terror watch list. It's a real thing. 

You say I'm being paranoid but I described something that already exists and the government doesn't dispute it. In fact, they recently debated exactly, precisely what I wrote. http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/senate-gun-votes-congress/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorist_Screening_Database

You are denying the terror watch list exists?! The government freaking admits it exists! Have you seriously read no news in, oh, the last decade? I can tell you didn't read any news after the Orlando shooting. This very debate was prominently in the news for weeks.

[Core]

10 minutes ago, LJC said:

So you think airports are not safer with out metal detectors. 

Really lol it  definitely makes a difference.  Just like stop and frisk in NY city 

Please stay on topic.

Lots and lots of words about stop and frisk in this thread. The only numbers given were a completely fictitious claim that it reduced murders in a one year period by 80% and then the numbers I provided that showed it's not the crime-fighting tool some supporters think it is and, most importantly, a few years ago when stop and frisk was massively curtailed, shootings and murders also dropped precipitously.

Data, people. Data. Statistics, numbers. If you don't have them, you have nothing. 

[LJC]

15 minutes ago, Core said:

I can see why so many think you're willfully ignorant. I described the terror watch list. It's a real thing. 

You say I'm being paranoid but I described something that already exists and the government doesn't dispute it. In fact, they recently debated exactly, precisely what I wrote. http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/senate-gun-votes-congress/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorist_Screening_Database

You are denying the terror watch list exists?! The government freaking admits it exists! Have you seriously read no news in, oh, the last decade? I can tell you didn't read any news after the Orlando shooting. This very debate was prominently in the news for weeks.

You obviously not to good in math how many people work for fed government  how many people on your  watch list a few thousand  10,000 50,000 even 100,000 it's like pissing in the ocean . And most those have a name liKE Mohammad lol so why are you worried for .

 

Approximately one out of twenty of the people on the list are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents.^[3]

 

^{If you do the math that's only 90,00} 

Edited September 26, 2016 by LJC

[Core]

10 minutes ago, LJC said:

You obviously not to good in math how many people work for fed government  how many people on your  watch list a few thousand  10,000 50,000 even 100,000 it's like pissing in the ocean . And most those have a name liKE Mohammad lol so why are you worried for .

I really, really don't like being impolite, but I don't think you're smart enough to realize how wrong you consistently are. I base this on your obvious, fundamental inability to understand what I even wrote (I'm sure most reading could follow it), the fact you have very strong opinions on topics you demonstrate no knowledge of whatsoever (your opinions on crossbows vs vertical screamed this), and the fact that your spelling is utterly atrocious. Like just beyond terrible, but you don't care because you don't know any better.

I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt but unfortunately I'm now in the same camp many others already got into insofar as your posts are concerned. Adding you to ignore for my own good, to be honest. I truly don't mean you ill will, but I consider your posts a waste of time and don't want to read them anymore.

Edited September 26, 2016 by Core

[LJC]

10 minutes ago, Core said:

I really, really don't like being impolite, but I don't think you're smart enough to realize how wrong you consistently are. I base this on your obvious, fundamental inability to understand what I even wrote (I'm sure most reading could follow it), the fact you have very strong opinions on topics you demonstrate no knowledge of whatsoever (your opinions on crossbows vs vertical screamed this), and the fact that your spelling is utterly atrocious. Like just beyond terrible, but you don't care because you don't know any better.

I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt but unfortunately I'm now in the same camp many others already got into insofar as your posts are concerned. Adding you to ignore for my own good, to be honest. I truly don't mean you ill will, but I consider your posts a waste of time and don't want to read them anymore.

The Terrorist Screening Database or TSDB is the central terrorist watchlist consolidated by the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center and used by multiple agencies to compile their specific watchlists and for screening. As of June 2016the list is estimated to contain over 2,484,442 records, consisting of 1,877,133 individual identities.^[1][2] Approximately 1,600 nominations are suggested daily, 600 names are removed and 4,800 records are modified by the U.S. intelligence community. Approximately one out of twenty of the people on the list are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents.

DID YOU READ THE  LAST PART 1 OUT OF 20 US CITIZEN 

THAT'S ONLY 90,000

OUT  OF 350 MILLION IS NOTHING 

 

You are  paranoid 

Edited September 26, 2016 by LJC

[LJC]

2 hours ago, Core said:

I really, really don't like being impolite, but I don't think you're smart enough to realize how wrong you consistently are. I base this on your obvious, fundamental inability to understand what I even wrote (I'm sure most reading could follow it), the fact you have very strong opinions on topics you demonstrate no knowledge of whatsoever (your opinions on crossbows vs vertical screamed this), and the fact that your spelling is utterly atrocious. Like just beyond terrible, but you don't care because you don't know any better.

I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt but unfortunately I'm now in the same camp many others already got into insofar as your posts are concerned. Adding you to ignore for my own good, to be honest. I truly don't mean you ill will, but I consider your posts a waste of time and don't want to read them anymore.

 

Than you for your kind words your another genius lol I'm sure 

Hmm you wouldn't  happen to smoke Alot of weed sounds like it from your paranoia of the terrorist watch list . Just think of the man power needed to watch only say 1000 people 24/7  let alone 350million.  Your fear is not very logical .for example it takes  the FBI  hundreds of FBI  agents years and years  to get into criminal organizations Like the mob Which has only a few hundred members. I think you have never really thought about it what it takes to watch people 24/7 like that . If it was so easy why have we had so may attacks   even after 9/11 . It's because it's impossible to track so many people obviously . 

It's  Time to get off the weed bro when you think the government is interested in you taken a dump in the woods . If you no what I mean . Lol