Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Hope this catches on...

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 9>
Author
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 12:57am
Originally posted by heliumman77 heliumman77 wrote:

Personally I think they are but no matter what It is a stupid law.


My dad's a cop. My girlfriend's dad is a state trooper. 

There's no opinion about it.  Quotas cause inaccurate police work, and are simply a common complaint people use to excuse their own mistakes.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
Susan Storm View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Shot at Love Contestant

Joined: 13 July 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Susan Storm Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 12:58am

You guys are all missing the big issue here.  Police should be violently opposing this law.

With crooks now forced to wear fitting pants, the police are going to have to return to exercizing - in order to keep up with the crooks that will no longer simply fall down while trying to run away.

Everybody knows that baggy pants, like crack and HIV, were originated by the CIA to keep the blacks in their place.   Now these Loosiana chumps have gone and messed it up.

"No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable."
Back to Top
heliumman77 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 July 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote heliumman77 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 12:58am
Well whatever I was just trying to emphasize the whole law created by the spinning of a wheel thing. Yes it's that stupid.
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:01am

I think alot of you are completely missing Linus' point...

It's illegal to investigate (or whatever legal term you want to use) a civilian without proper cause. "Silly" laws like these allow officers more room to question people. There are lots of laws that alot of people don't realize even exist because officers don't use them on a daily basis, but they exist for the simple fact that sometimes officers need a reason to investigate their suspicions, but do not have that reason.

Setting that completely aside, whether you like it or not certain cultural trends set you apart as being more likely to be involved in certain types of crimes.

 

Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:02am
Originally posted by Susan Storm Susan Storm wrote:

You guys are all missing the big issue here.  Police should be violently opposing this law.

With crooks now forced to wear fitting pants, the police are going to have to return to exercizing - in order to keep up with the crooks that will no longer simply fall down while trying to run away.

Everybody knows that baggy pants, like crack and HIV, were originated by the CIA to keep the blacks in their place.   Now these Loosiana chumps have gone and messed it up.

Back to Top
White o Light View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Guested. blatant pornographic post

Joined: 12 June 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2772
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote White o Light Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:03am
Originally posted by stratoaxe stratoaxe wrote:

I think alot of you are completely missing Linus' point...

It's illegal to investigate (or whatever legal term you want to use) a civilian without proper cause. "Silly" laws like these allow officers more room to question people. There are lots of laws that alot of people don't realize even exist because officers don't use them on a daily basis, but they exist for the simple fact that sometimes officers need a reason to investigate their suspicions, but do not have that reason.

Setting that completely aside, whether you like it or not certain cultural trends set you apart as being more likely to be involved in certain types of crimes.

 



This is as bad as during the McCarthy era when people with guitars were allowed to be investigated for being communists.
Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:04am
Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

If a law like this is simply being enacted to allow the search of a certain group of people, like you have said. It is unconstitutional, and will be considered an illegal profiling.


USAF... show me where in the Constitution it says profiling wasn't allowed. I have been unable to locate it.


Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:


Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:


Originally posted by USAF USAF wrote:

And I'd like to see a lawyer try and deny the generally viewed connection between certain clothing styles and certain social groups or races.
That right there is profiling. You automatically think about a certain group when you see certain clothing.
No. It seems like a know-it-all like you would at least take the time to understand how "profiling" applies to the laws surrounding police work.


Wow.. you totally missed this part in the SAME post:

Originally posted by me me wrote:

And yes, cops profile, it's part of their job. What, they can't think that a lady walking in circles on a dark street just MIGHT be a prostitute? They can't think that a car leaving a known drug house just MIGHT have taken part in a drug deal?




Back to Top
heliumman77 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 July 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote heliumman77 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:06am
I know what he is talking about but its none the less is stupid I mean as Linus said some profiling is in being a police officer obviously but I think this is over the line and is only gonna cause problems. Profiling will become more predominant in police work Just gives more reason to pull over the African American in a Porsche etc. car or stop the teenager with baggy clothes walking down the road. Now sometimes this could work but it's stupid. 
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:08am

Originally posted by heliumman77 heliumman77 wrote:

I know what he is talking about but its none the less is stupid I mean as Linus said some profiling is in being a police officer obviously but I think this is over the line and is only gonna cause problems. Profiling will become more predominant in police work Just gives more reason to pull over the African American in a Porsche etc. car or stop the teenager with baggy clothes walking down the road. Now sometimes this could work but it's stupid. 

Why did you just equate black people and Porsches?

Back to Top
Susan Storm View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Shot at Love Contestant

Joined: 13 July 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1352
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Susan Storm Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:12am

Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:


USAF... show me where in the Constitution it says profiling wasn't allowed. I have been unable to locate it.

Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.

"No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable."
Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:12am
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

If a law like this is simply being enacted to allow the search of a certain group of people, like you have said. It is unconstitutional, and will be considered an illegal profiling.

You're right, I forgot there's nothing in the Bill of Rights about equality, how stupid of me.

Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:


Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:


Originally posted by USAF USAF wrote:

And I'd like to see a lawyer try and deny the generally viewed connection between certain clothing styles and certain social groups or races.
That right there is profiling. You automatically think about a certain group when you see certain clothing.
No. It seems like a know-it-all like you would at least take the time to understand how "profiling" applies to the laws surrounding police work.


Wow.. you totally missed this part in the SAME post:


No, you tried to say what I was doing was profiling.  It's not.  What YOU are suggesting, is.

Originally posted by me me wrote:

And yes, cops profile, it's part of their job. What, they can't think that a lady walking in circles on a dark street just MIGHT be a prostitute? They can't think that a car leaving a known drug house just MIGHT have taken part in a drug deal?


Following a car from a known drug house is NOT in any way, shape, or form, the same as creating a law for the sole purpose of making it easier for a certain group of people to be bothered by the police.





Originally posted by stratoaxe stratoaxe wrote:

Setting that completely aside, whether you like it or not certain cultural trends set you apart as being more likely to be involved in certain types of crimes.

 



So, because my pants don't fit tightly around my waste, I (a well-to-do white kid) am more likely to do, or be caught with, drugs? It's yet another poor attempt by an elderly bureaucracy to make laws based on things it doesn't understand. 

"Sagging" or loose fitting pants have nothing to do with drugs or gangs, or anythign of the sort, it's simply part of fashion now a days. I seriously doubt that either of you know the actual origins of it in the first place, and yet you still make your drug based generalizations.

Nice try.


Edited by usafpilot07 - 15 August 2007 at 1:13am
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
heliumman77 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 July 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote heliumman77 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:15am
The first and fourteenth do it too and I was merely making an example strato.
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:19am

Originally posted by Susan Storm Susan Storm wrote:


So, because my pants don't fit tightly around my waste, I (a well-to-do white kid) am more likely to do, or be caught with, drugs? It's yet another poor attempt by an elderly bureaucracy to make laws based on things it doesn't understand. 

"Sagging" or loose fitting pants have nothing to do with drugs or gangs, or anythign of the sort, it's simply part of fashion now a days. I seriously doubt that either of you know the actual origins of it in the first place, and yet you still make your drug based generalizations.

Nice try.

Unfortunately you don't have to make on the spot decisions based on visual evidence like officers do every day.

And I don't remember ever making "drug based" generalizations. You dress like a gangster, prepare to be profiled as a gangster, is what I'm saying.

Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:22am
Originally posted by Susan Storm Susan Storm wrote:

Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

USAF... show me where in the Constitution it says profiling wasn't allowed. I have been unable to locate it.


Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.



Uhh.. no. Nothing mentions profiling.

Unlawful searches and seizures... a frisk is not a a search. But if there is probable cause as to a law being broken, and a search does take place, it is no longer unlawful.

Unlawful would be a cop walking down the street, seeing you (and you doing NOTHING wrong at all) and he reaches in your pockets.


14th, due process and equal protection. Again, nothing about profiling.

Due process = court proceedings.

Equal protection = allowing all races to the same rights.


Originally posted by susan susan wrote:

So, because my pants don't fit tightly around my waste, I (a well-to-do white kid) am more likely to do, or be caught with, drugs?


I'll use my old home town as an example.

The whole area was mainly well to do white people
Originally posted by wikipedia search of Lake Orion wikipedia search of Lake Orion wrote:

The racial makeup of the village was 97.79% White, 0.26% African American

Quote The median income for a household in the village was $51,311, and the median income for a family was $71,250


Pretty well to do if you ask me.


But out of 2600 students at my highschool, MANY had done drugs. No, I don't have numbers, you will have to take my word for it.


Just because you're rich and white doesn't mean you're immune from the law.

Edited by Linus - 15 August 2007 at 1:25am

Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:24am
Originally posted by stratoaxe stratoaxe wrote:

Originally posted by Susan Storm Susan Storm wrote:


So, because my pants don't fit tightly around my waste, I (a well-to-do white kid) am more likely to do, or be caught with, drugs? It's yet another poor attempt by an elderly bureaucracy to make laws based on things it doesn't understand. 

"Sagging" or loose fitting pants have nothing to do with drugs or gangs, or anythign of the sort, it's simply part of fashion now a days. I seriously doubt that either of you know the actual origins of it in the first place, and yet you still make your drug based generalizations.

Nice try.

Unfortunately you don't have to make on the spot decisions based on visual evidence like officers do every day.

And I don't remember ever making "drug based" generalizations. You dress like a gangster, prepare to be profiled as a gangster, is what I'm saying.



And what qualifies as a gangster's attire?
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
heliumman77 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 July 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote heliumman77 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:25am
1st             
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment

14th            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_Uni ted_States_Constitution

Read section 1 of the 14th put those together and what do you get N-O P-R-O-F-I-L-I-N-G!!!!

Thank you come again.
Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:30am
Originally posted by your wikipedia link your wikipedia link wrote:

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the United States Bill of Rights. It prohibits the federal legislature from making laws that establish religion (the "Establishment Clause") or prohibit free exercise of religion (the "Free Exercise Clause"), laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to assemble peaceably, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.



Nope, no mention on profiling.

Originally posted by other wikipedia link other wikipedia link wrote:

It includes the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses



Again, no mention of profiling.




Back to Top
heliumman77 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 July 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote heliumman77 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:31am
It doesn't say it you gotta read and understand it maybe? Or should I spell it out again.
Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:32am
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

[

Originally posted by other wikipedia link other wikipedia link wrote:

It includes the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses



Again, no mention of profiling.





You do understand that equal protection applies to a person's rights from law enforcement and the judicial system, not minorities right? Because that's what you've been hinting at the whole time.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
heliumman77 View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 July 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote heliumman77 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 August 2007 at 1:36am
Freedom of speech the clothes you where and you gotta keep it equal gangsta
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 9>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.