Why Can’t We Talk About the Murder Wave?

[Tony Stark]

Wrong, even in NY the appeals court reversed on other grounds and remained silent on the issue. Those cases are not in Chicago's circuit and would not be binding.

Chicago Federal Courts will likely rule based on the precedent The NY Courts set.

 

[Tony Stark]

And it should be noted that the NYC police department only changed their policies due to public pressure. There are still many other police departments across the U.S. still using stop & frisk. Which should properly be called -- Stop, question & frisk.

Apples and oranges the way NY and other cities do it which is why ipatent wants The NY way.

 

[ipatent]

Chicago Federal Courts will likely rule based on the precedent The NY Courts set.

Not necessarily.

 

[Tony Stark]

Even the case you mentioned didn't suggest that.

Thats what her decision was based on and they did not overrule her overall ruling.

 

[Tony Stark]

Not necessarily.

Most likely.

Terry vs Ohio would not be ruled constitutional if it was only applied to 90% black and brown people.

 

[ipatent]

only applied to 90% black and brown people

Did you make that number up?

 

[Tony Stark]

Here is a good summary of stop, question, and frisk as it applies to NYC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_City

Stop-and-frisk in New York means stop-and-frisk black and brown people.

 

[Tony Stark]

Did you make that number up?

No,I did not

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_City

"Ninety percent of those stopped in 2017 were African-American or Latino, mostly aged 14–24. Seventy percent of those stopped were later found to be innocent"

 

[ipatent]

No,I did not

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_City

"Ninety percent of those stopped in 2017 were African-American or Latino, mostly aged 14–24. Seventy percent of those stopped were later found to be innocent"

Why would the police do that if they didn't think it was the most efficient way to reduce crime?

 

[Tony Stark]

Why would the police do that if they didn't think it was the most efficient way to reduce crime?

What is efficient is not always constitutional.Stopping all crime would be way more efficient if the constitution didn't have to be followed.