This seems a bit big brotherish

[Hachover]

Originally Posted by Lucy

And England does it all over the place, and the English seem pretty comfortable with it.

Not entirely comfortable. For example, the law requires that the road be painted yellow for 200(?) meters before a speeding camera.

[Standtall]

Threads like these amaze me.

Getting so many people so up in arms about wanting to have privacy when they are IN PUBLIC PLACES.

The same group that thinks private bars are PUBLIC so owners there lose their rights want special rights given to people in PUBLIC places to remain basically hidden from view.

It is amazing really.

If you don't want to be seen in public, don't go in public.

[Actuary321]

Originally Posted by Rickson

100-1 was conservative from my CONgress critters office staff...more like 1000's to 0

Sorry, I miss read your post. Didn't realize you were said constituent calls. Though you were talking about pundits.

Some but not enough of those who voted against that flood of calls have reaped the consequences.

[General Apathy]

Originally Posted by Standtall

Threads like these amaze me.

Getting so many people so up in arms about wanting to have privacy when they are IN PUBLIC PLACES.

The same group that thinks private bars are PUBLIC so owners there lose their rights want special rights given to people in PUBLIC places to remain basically hidden from view.

It is amazing really.

If you don't want to be seen in public, don't go in public.

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0716/ny-...risk-database/

Well in NY if you get frisked in public but didn't do anything your data is no longer kept in a database. Interesting that Bloomberg and the top cop don't like this.

Gov. David Paterson signed legislation Friday that eliminates a database of thousands of people stopped and frisked by New York City police without facing charges, calling the practice "not a policy for a democracy."

Paterson signed the law over vehement objections of New York City's mayor and police commissioner, who said the city was losing a key crime-fighting tool.

But the governor said the policy that targets criminals won't be affected by eliminating a database of people who were stopped, then released.

"This law does not in any way tamper with our stop-and-frisk policies," Paterson said. "What it does is it disallows the use of personal data of innocent people who have not done anything wrong. ... That is not a policy for a democracy."

Critics have said information from such stops, mainly of blacks and Latinos who are innocent, can lead to future police suspicion and surveillance. Police say the database helped to solve crimes, including anti-gay and anti-Hispanic bias attacks.

"Albany has robbed us of a great crime-fighting tool, one that saved lives," Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said in a statement. "Without it, there will be, inevitably, killers and other criminals who won't be captured as quickly, or perhaps ever."

Paterson said he had met with Kelly and spoken to Mayor Michael Bloomberg, but had not been persuaded that the database protects the city from crime.

"Civil justice, and I think common sense, would suggest that those who are questioned and not even accused of crimes be protected from any further stigma or suspicion," Paterson said.

He signed the bill at a press conference with the bill's sponsors and supporters including the city's public advocate, Bill de Blasio.

"Today's reform of the stop and frisk database reaffirms a basic value of this country. The government cannot keep tabs on people who have done nothing wrong," de Blasio said.

Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, praised Paterson for signing the legislation.

"Innocent people stopped by the police for doing nothing more than going to school, work or the subway should not become permanent criminal suspects," said Lieberman. "By signing this bill, the Paterson administration has put itself on the right side of history and leaves an important legacy in support of civil rights, civil liberties and common sense."

In his sponsor's memo, Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries, D-Brooklyn, said that in 2009, the New York Police Department stopped 574,304 people, nearly 90 percent of them people of color, and nine out of 10 were released without any further legal action. Data show 2.5 million stops since 2005.

Sen. Eric Adams, a Brooklyn Democrat and former NYPD captain who sponsored the bill, said Friday the bill would protect innocent people from being targeted by police, especially minorities.

"Our fear is not to have our sons (be) victims of aggressive criminal behavior, but we also don't want our children to be victims of aggressive police behavior," Adams said.

The automated database, believed to be the only one in the country, grew out of a law requiring police to keep details such as age and race on anyone they stop, and it was envisioned as a way to safeguard civil rights.

The law, enacted in 2001, required the police department to turn information over to lawmakers every quarter. It was aimed at uncovering whether police were disproportionately stopping black and Hispanic men. But police also indefinitely hold on to addresses and names of people stopped — information not required by the law.

The bill, which takes effect immediately, would not prohibit police from entering into an electronic database generic identifiers, such as gender, race and location of the stop.

Good for Patterson, though.

[Incredible Hulctuary]

Originally Posted by General Apathy

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0716/ny-...risk-database/

Well in NY if you get frisked in public but didn't do anything your data is no longer kept in a database. Interesting that Bloomberg and the top cop don't like this.

Now Paterson needs to address why they are applying stop-and-frisk to people who haven't done anything in the first place.

[General Apathy]

Agree

There is another destructive consequence of the stop-and-frisk policy that has not received enough attention: it has made New York City the marijuana arrest capital of the world. While the police justify stop-and-frisks as a way to find guns, what is most often found are small amounts of marijuana. Although marijuana was decriminalized in New York State in 1977, Bloomberg's police arrested more than 46,000 people last year on marijuana possession - 10 percent of all arrests in the city, up from one percent in the mid 1990s.

If possession of marijuana is supposed to be decriminalized in New York, how does this happen? Often because, in the course of interacting with the police, individuals may be asked to empty their pockets, which results in the pot being "open to public view" - which is, technically, a crime. And because blacks and Latinos are the ones most often stopped, they make up 87 percent of low-level marijuana arrests, even though they are no more likely than whites to use or sell it. These arrests produce permanent criminal records that disqualify people for jobs, housing, schooling and student loans.

Good grief. It's in "public view" because the police made them empty their pockets, and that's a crime!!?? Someone needs to change that law. The police are generally opposed to decriminalization statues, and of course they take advantage of loopholes but that loophole needs to be removed.

[Mr. Micro]

I wonder if the police "made them" empty their pockets or if the police just "suggested" they empty their pockets. Just like when you get pulled over and the police sort-of ask, sort-of tell you that they will be searching your car. You might be able to deny them the right to search you or your car but they sure aren't going to let you know that.