Sunday, May 5, 2013

They really think this is a good idea?

From the NY Post:

A suspected gangbanger and iPhone thief arrested at a Queens subway station would still be on the loose under a City Council bill to prevent cops from searching for suspects by ethnicity, the NYPD said yesterday.

Louis Barragan, 17, allegedly a member of the Sureno 13 gang with a lengthy rap sheet, was busted Wednesday evening by cops who heard a description on the radios that included the word “Hispanic.”

The use of ethnicity — along with gender and age — as a “determinative” factor in arrests and other police action would be illegal if the City Council passes a bill sponsored by Jumaane Williams (D-Brooklyn). It is one of four proposed bills targeting stop-and-frisk.

NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said cops would never have been able to close in on Barragan without a proper description of the suspect.

“How could they? The bill prohibits law-enforcement action ‘that relies, to any degree, on actual or perceived race, color, ethnicity, religion, national origin, age, sex, gender,’ ” Browne said, quoting part of the bill.


Anonymous said...

Tsk, tsk, tsk...
we dare not offend the "Hispanics" and "Blacks"...although they are the ones who are primarily committing these crimes (and others).

These are anti social (a lot of them unemployable) creatures who prey on society. Yet the liberal assholes insist on protecting them...even if they steal from a liberal dummy's own pocket.

Liberals, apparently, prefer political correctness over correcting the behavior of these enemies of society.

Anonymous said...

I've seen oblivious hipsters and a lot of preoccupied Asians flaunting their expensive tech stuff on the subway...without thought.

Instead of remaining alert, which any hard core New Yorker would do, they are totally absorbed in the bright images flashing on the screens of their devices.

If ever there was an easy mark for a thief...this lot of boobs are the easiest to steal from.

What could be so important on your "I-phone" that can't wait until later?

That's why I still prefer reading a paper back instead of carrying a "Nook".

Nobody wants my dog eared volume printed on pulp...and if I drop it, it won't break...or run out of battery power.

With an "I-pad" ranging about $500-$800 on the hoof...some of these dummies bring it upon themselves.

Anonymous said...

Heard on the radio last week:

In San Fransisco the ever increasing thefts of expensive tech stuff, has led to the forming a special police undercover unit.

Officers pose as buyers of these stolen goods and then make arrests.

The way I see it, If you aren't smart enough to safeguard your I-phone, then you can afford to lose it.

Why waste tax dollars on relatively trivial crimes?
Cops should be making drug and gang arrests.

Jon Torodash said...

Crapper, you stopped just before the best line:

'Williams insisted cops are misreading the language. “You absolutely should use a complete description, including race, so you can do good police work,” he said.'

Let's see about that: here's the full text.

The salient paragraph (emphasis mine):

1. "[Racial or ethnic] Bias-based profiling" means an act of a member of the force of the police department or other law enforcement officer that relies on actual or perceived race, [ethnicity, religion or] national origin color, creed, age, alienage or citizenship status, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or housing status as the determinative factor in initiating law enforcement action against an individual, rather than an individual's behavior or other information or circumstances that links a person or persons [of a particular race, ethnicity, religion national origin] to suspected unlawful activity.

The language seems perfectly ambiguous to me. It is incumbent upon the bills' sponsor(s) to be sure that people cannot "misread" the language and expose the NYPD with a rash of lawsuits. Legislation needs to be taken seriously!

Anonymous said...

Liberalism = mental disorder with a death wish attached. How do you people take it in NYC?

Captain Renault said...

The bill prohibits law-enforcement action ‘that relies, to any degree, on actual or perceived race, color, ethnicity, religion, national origin, age, sex, gender


In my precinct, we have ways to work around these ridiculous laws.

Can't use any "determinative" factors?

We can always....


Anonymous said...

A description of a would be thief would of course give potential height, weight and race, which I totally understand, but the stop and frisk can be done without probable cause and I'm sorry that's wrong. And the police know that so they should stop condoning their unconstitutional behavior.

Anonymous said...

The point is that you can't use race as a way to judge if someone may be guilty. Race cannot be the reason you give if asked why that person was stopped. That is totally irrelevant to descriptions. If a cop is in the process of finding a suspect, there's nothing wrong with accurately describing that suspect (including race). So, no, providing the cops weren't after Louis simply because he is hispanic, he still would have been described and caught.