You felt Mamdani's position related to Israel was important enough to put in your post.
Whether you think thats important or the news outlets/ politicians you get your information from thinks that way its insane.
Every American should be anti-Israel, if not its very existence then the way their government has operated from day one; from the Nakba, to apartheid, to occupation, to genocide.
There are laws in the US that say you can not not do business with them and they have repeatedly tried to get laws past to mean that any criticism of Israel is hate speech.
If Mamdani is anti-Israel then that means he's sane and deserves support.
As for the NYPD being racist... I mean c'mon
Stop and Frisk ring a bell?
How about this, from last year:
A new report from the NYPD's court-appointed monitor says the department still has plenty of work to do to address racial disparities in policing.
www.cbsnews.com
I will have to read that article tomorrow and will get back to you on that. I am really not going to have the israel or Palestine debate with you in this thread-it’s simply not germaine to this topic. I only mentioned it because he claimed that the nypd has their boot on the neck of new Yorkers and the idf laces up the boot. How in the world could any cop either want to work under that man or be able to work under him?
As for stop and frisk, teach a decent amount on that topic. The primary point that I get across is that it is unconstitutional. It gives an officer the right to stop and do a Terry frisk per Terry v Ohio on anyone they choose without having to have reasonable articulable suspicion-the belief that a crime has occurred, is occurring( or is about to occur based upon knowledge and training and knowledge about recent crimes in the area, time of night or if the crimes are believed to be happening during a time certain time frame, knowledge of the area-is it high crime or drug dealing area, or maybe the officer has specific knowledge about the individual that when taken with some of the other info, give the officers the authority to detain and question the person.
As for stop and frisk and the numbers that came from the article and other studies on the practice initiated under Bratton, I make no excuses for what was ruled unconstitutional in 2013-finally. It was a predatory practice where more blacks were stopped than whites (more in that in a min) but the reason it was used in in the first place was the extreme violence of the 90s crack epidemic and gangs fighting over drug dealing corners in able to control that black market cash.
So, you have all the violence in just about instance with large cities looking like war zones and your primary goal of protecting the sanctity of life-meaning we are going to probably disagree with some things from here on.
First, as for the numbers that showed blacks were stopped more than whites, I would counter with this: where is almost all the shootings, murders, armed robbery.
FUCK! I just lost everything I had typed from here on so I have to very quickly rewrite it.
Ok; where are the most occurrences of violent crimes such as robbery, carjacking, shootings, and murders? What can be said about these area’s socioeconomic status? And what can be said about who lives there? First, the violence is very closely correlated to the poorest areas in every city. I stress the last part because the actual poorest places in the country reside in Appalachia and the violence and crime simply are not alarming at all, so there are other factors at play. When I teach my classes this stuff, one of the possible answers for that has to do with population density. So you have a ton of people in a small space that are poor and competing for resources. I think that pretty well covers out base, but now we need to discuss who resides in these poor and violent neighborhoods. The answer is minorities. Depending on what part of what city you are currently in, a different minority will be the dominant and most populous. In little china or a china town area of a given city-it’s going to be Chinese people. Here’s where things get tricky though-not the same high levels of violence that we see in the other poor minority dominated spaces-so something else to discuss at a point later down the road. Then you have your black neighborhoods and your Hispanic neighborhoods. Comparing those two, they come in at 1 and 2 in terms of the amount of violence-specifically your murder rate is the easiest to calculate and is a generally accepted metric to determine how safe an area is. They also have other statistical calculations that can indicate how likely you are to be a victim of a certain type of crime. Since property crimes like theft and vandalism compared to violent crimes are 5:1-the good news is you’re more likely to have your car broken into rather than to be robbed at gun point.
So, we have established that our poorest black neighborhoods are where we go to find the highest crime levels and more importantly, our highest violent crime rates.
So with that in mind, you’re the police chief of a department and you are getting pressured by the mayor and city council-whom have your career in their hands. They decide if you remain the chief or if you get bused back to the traffic division. So, where are you sending your officers?
Having been a district commander who has had to make all of these decisions before, you always send your cops where the most crime is or most likely to be. You start with the most violent neighborhoods and there are so many different tactics you can attempt and there is no set order you have to go in as to what you try first. Obviously, you have to answer calls for service; but you’re also going to select the golden boys of the patrol unit to create yourself a brand new shiny unit that has the goal of knocking down these violent crime numbers. Again, this is my bag, so I could go on about this all day.
Now
Chief bratton decided to tackle the violent crime epidemic in the 89s and 99s by implementing a new strategy he called stop and frisk with the thoughts that they would get tons of gun and drugs off the streets because just like poverty and crime go together, so do drugs and guns: I have already said that stop and frisk was unconstitutional, so we already have an issue there, but now you’re applying it to a very marginalized group, which makes it look doubly as bad. The net result is often seen as a failure because in about 600k stop and frisk incidents, the most common contraband discovered was pot: guns turned up the least, and while I can’t remember the exact success rate, it it was under 1%. I don’t have time to look it up, but I calculated it for my class and even at that abysmal success rate; they still managed to get just under 20k guns off of the streets during the time stop and frisk was active.
So it looks like overpolocong to detractors of law enforcement and activists, but I always stress that cops go where the crime is regardless of race of the inhabitants color of their skin. So Bratton at least knew he had to focus on the poorest most violent neighborhoods m, he just went about it too aggressively and trampled on peoples fourth amendment rights:
