Politicspolitics

Thu Feb 13, 2020, 02:05 PM

I'm tired of Cons dissing Bloomberg on his comments on stop/frisk and the credit debacle.

Note that even the Lefty fact checkers are all but silent on the content. On the other hand, if you're trying to 'skunk' him with the lefties, go for it; just don't demean long standing Con. doctrine in the process!

20 replies, 299 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 20 replies Author Time Post
Reply I'm tired of Cons dissing Bloomberg on his comments on stop/frisk and the credit debacle. (Original post)
Dumper Feb 13 OP
Charlie Mike Feb 13 #1
Dumper Feb 14 #10
Charlie Mike Feb 14 #11
shogun Feb 13 #2
Charlie Mike Feb 13 #5
Muddling Through Monday #17
Lowrider1984 Feb 14 #7
Valishin Feb 14 #8
OTSmithers Feb 13 #3
GoodKraic Feb 13 #4
Dumper Feb 13 #6
GoodKraic Monday #14
Valishin Feb 14 #9
GoodKraic Monday #13
Valishin Monday #16
GoldwatersSoul Feb 14 #12
Tovera Monday #18
PrescientWon. Monday #15
GoldwatersSoul Monday #19
PrescientWon. Monday #20

Response to Dumper (Original post)

Thu Feb 13, 2020, 03:36 PM

1. I'm against S&F, Bloomberg notwithstanding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #1)

Fri Feb 14, 2020, 01:22 PM

10. Even if the cops had constitutional grounds? Your position appears to ASSUME

they never do!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dumper (Reply #10)

Fri Feb 14, 2020, 01:28 PM

11. Constitutional grounds would be probable cause the individual committed a specific offense.

S&F is neither of those.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dumper (Original post)

Thu Feb 13, 2020, 04:13 PM

2. What's the credit debacle?

Havnt heard of that one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shogun (Reply #2)

Thu Feb 13, 2020, 05:01 PM

5. My assumption is: Bloomberg said the 2008 derivatives crash came from

ending the practice of red lining.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Charlie Mike (Reply #5)

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 11:22 AM

17. You know, he's not totally wrong on that.

The response to the end of "red lining" was, in part, to give loans to a large number of people with poor credit and a lack of documented income. That did no one any favors; the people getting loans were not prepared for the responsibility and the taxpayers were put on the hook for the defaults.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shogun (Reply #2)

Fri Feb 14, 2020, 12:45 PM

7. Apparently, Bloomy disagreed with the libral policy

of writing mortgage loans to unemployed people, and actually stated that "they won't pay their mortgage payments".
Blasphemy! Racist!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shogun (Reply #2)

Fri Feb 14, 2020, 01:09 PM

8. They are referring to "red lining"

which is in a nutshell the practice of declaring some areas so poor that everyone in those areas are too risky to lend to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dumper (Original post)

Thu Feb 13, 2020, 04:51 PM

3. Stop and Frisk is police state tyranny. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dumper (Original post)

Thu Feb 13, 2020, 04:59 PM

4. Stop & Frisk saved minority lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoodKraic (Reply #4)

Thu Feb 13, 2020, 05:37 PM

6. And what about roadblocks where cops stop and closely surveil drivers?

Last edited Thu Feb 13, 2020, 07:40 PM - Edit history (1)

Hasn't that cleared SCOTUS?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dumper (Reply #6)

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 11:05 AM

14. Was there a reason to surveil the drivers?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoodKraic (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 14, 2020, 01:11 PM

9. The problem is

that it assumes a right to search and seizure that the Constitution expressly forbids and for good reason.

No stop and frisk of known convicted felons that's another matter entirely as you can make the consent part of any parole condition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Valishin (Reply #9)

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 11:03 AM

13. I agree they cant just stop and frisk anyone

for any reason. It should be a known gang member, someone acting strangely, etc. The only argument I’ve ever heard against it though is it’s targeted a disproportionate number of AA’s which is a lazy, BS argument. Stopping the program completely will end up with more AA deaths.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoodKraic (Reply #13)

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 11:21 AM

16. The disproportionate argument goes right out the window

the moment you account for the disproportionate representation both in the committing of violent crimes which is why you would have stop and frisk. After all such an effort isn't going to find evidence of someone embezzling or committing wire fraud. In addition it is compounded by the disproportionate representation among high population areas. The more condensed the populace and higher the crime rate the more police presence and the more likelihood of interactions between police and civilians.

Here's a little comparison for those living in urban areas to consider. How long going about your normal business will you go without at least passing by a cop even if you don't directly interact? A few hours, a day maybe? In rural areas its hardly uncommon to not see a cop for a week or even a month unless you go looking for them. The more rural your daily habits the less likely common encounters.

Ironically Mini Mike's recently uncovered statements wouldn't have been wrong or even really bad if he hadn't made the statements as absolutes and hadn't recently started an apology tour.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dumper (Original post)

Fri Feb 14, 2020, 03:52 PM

12. He is a fucking tyrant...

He can stick a nanny state right up his cooter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoldwatersSoul (Reply #12)

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 11:41 AM

18. This!

Bloomberg is unacceptable...full stop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dumper (Original post)

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 11:18 AM

15. I have no problem with s&f

But I'll sure as hell use it as a club to take to Mini Mike.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PrescientWon. (Reply #15)

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 11:47 AM

19. I have a huge problem with it...

What stops them from stopping cars, or entering homes...I know my house has several guns in it...that means they are going to be able to pick through my shit for hours looking for something to bust me on.

Personal freedoms will become a thing of the past so some can feel. "Safe."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoldwatersSoul (Reply #19)

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 11:54 AM

20. True

But in this context, it means sending cops into high crime areas and having them initiate cursory stops to look for guns, cash, drugs, etc...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspolitics