NYC Council Bill Could Ban Cops From Identifying Suspects Based on Simple Descriptors Such as Race, - Polidicks

[t]http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/NYPD-Captains-Endowment-Association-ad.jpg[/t] [QUOTE]Blind and unable to do their job is what NYPD union officials say a new bill proposed by the city council would do to cops if it prevents them from using race, age, gender and more as identifying characteristics for law enforcement action, according to the Post. The Post reported NYPD Captains Endowment Association President Roy Richter, who is the officer pictured in the “How effective is a police officer with a blindfold on?”-ad, saying these “are very important descriptive terms to let officers know who to look for.”[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/19/surprising-nyc-council-bill-could-ban-cops-from-identifying-suspects-based-on-simple-descriptors-such-as-race-gender-and-age/"]Click clack[/URL] [B]Update thanks to Bradyns[/B] [QUOTE=Bradyns;41101730]TheBlaze is owned by Glenn Beck.. Take with a large amount of sodium chloride. [E] Also, Suggest that everyone reads the legislation: [code]§14-151 [Racial or Ethnic]Bias-based Profiling Prohibited. a. Definitions. As used in this section, the following terms have the following meanings: 1. "[Racial or ethnic]Bias-based profiling" means an act of a member of the force of the police department or other law enforcement officer that relies on actual or perceived race, [ethnicity, religion or] national origin, color, creed, age, alienage or citizenship status, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or housing status as the determinative factor in initiating law enforcement action against an individual, rather than an individual's behavior or other information or circumstances that links a person or persons [of a particular race, ethnicity, religion national origin] to suspected unlawful activity.[/code] [URL]http://legistar.council.nyc.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=1444267&GUID=BCB20F20-50EF-4E9B-8919-C51E15182DBF&Options=ID|Text|&Search=1080[/URL][/QUOTE]

How else do you describe someone?

[QUOTE=breakyourfac;41101664]How else do you describe someone?[/QUOTE] by taste

Rated the article dumb, not you OP.

[QUOTE=breakyourfac;41101664]How else do you describe someone?[/QUOTE] Clothing, height, weight. I'm not defending it, but that's about the limit of what you can do. [quote=the article]...race, [ethnicity, religion or] national origin, color, creed, age, alienage or citizenship status, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or housing status...[/quote] Not only do a few of these not make sense (how do you identify someone as a Christian? all this does is make it illegal to identify some Islamic women's clothing if they're wearing the burka. also, identifying someone by their sexual orientation? unless it's one of those gay pride parade things, this doesn't help to begin with), but it makes the job of identifying a suspect harder than it already is. This is idiotic.

People don't all look the same, just because someone is "black" or "white" doesn't make someone racist for identify a person as such. Jeez

TheBlaze is owned by Glenn Beck.. Take with a large amount of sodium chloride. [E] Also, Suggest that everyone reads the legislation: [code]§14-151 [Racial or Ethnic]Bias-based Profiling Prohibited. a. Definitions. As used in this section, the following terms have the following meanings: 1. "[Racial or ethnic]Bias-based profiling" means an act of a member of the force of the police department or other law enforcement officer that relies on actual or perceived race, [ethnicity, religion or] national origin, color, creed, age, alienage or citizenship status, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or housing status as the determinative factor in initiating law enforcement action against an individual, rather than an individual's behavior or other information or circumstances that links a person or persons [of a particular race, ethnicity, religion national origin] to suspected unlawful activity.[/code] [URL]http://legistar.council.nyc.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=1444267&GUID=BCB20F20-50EF-4E9B-8919-C51E15182DBF&Options=ID|Text|&Search=1080[/URL]

Not even disability? That's like the easiest fucking way to find someone. "HE HAD A ROBOT HAND SO I THINK HE WAS AN AMPUTEE! JEEZ JENKINS WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING WE CANT GO OFF OF THAT."

[QUOTE=breakyourfac;41101664]How else do you describe someone?[/QUOTE]I think they meant races of people who might look like trouble, not suspects. Surely they can't be that stupid.

[QUOTE] Councilman Brad Lander (D-Brooklyn) is one of 30 co-sponsors of the bill. “They know they’re misrepresenting the legislation,” Lander said. “Police officers will continue to be able to use skin color and gender and age and height in suspect descriptions. What doesn’t work is profiling people based solely on they’re being one race, being one religion, being gay, living in public housing.”[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]The Post reported that Williams and Lander have said police would be allowed to use descriptions in investigations, but they would be barred from stopping someone based solely on those descriptions. [/QUOTE]

Im guessing this is meant so they can't just drag someone off the street as a suspect because they are a "black middle-aged man" but I feel like this could seriously hurt the polices ability to arrest actual perpetrators if they need to waste time getting extra information to make sure they are the person they are looking for.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;41101791]article stuff[/QUOTE] But that still doesn't make any sense. Is the bill just redefining what profiling is? Why even include some of the ones they listed?

[QUOTE=Unisath;41101967]But that still doesn't make any sense. Is the bill just redefining what profiling is? Why even include some of the ones they listed?[/QUOTE] the bill is telling officers they can't pull people off the streets simply for being of a certain race/sex/religion/etc, which is completely reasonable. if you have a suspect description that is black male you can't just grab random black dudes until you find the right one. you can use it to narrow your search and confirm possible suspects with reasonable suspicion

[QUOTE=Yumyumbublegum;41101679]by taste[/QUOTE] Suspect is approximately five feet, 10 inches, and believes it is a good idea to leave the house wearing a purple shirt and green pants.

[QUOTE=Medevilae;41102371][B]This should be added to the OP[/B][/QUOTE] Done

"Identifying suspects" is the key here. If someone is a suspect in a specific crime, I don't see the problem. Example: Be on the lookout for a suspect in an armed robbery, suspect is male/white and ... The problem is if by 'suspect' they mean stopping people at random, for unspecified 'crime'. Example: a cop is driving by a black guy walking down the street and stops him. Why? He 'suspects' the guy is up to something. Up to what? Nothing specific, just he's suspicious looking. That's wrong, and shouldn't be allowed.

I don't think it really matters, they usually find a way to fuck it up anyways. For example during the whole "Black Rambo - Dorner" situation two women were gunned down because their car seemed similar. [url]http://jonathanturley.org/2013/02/11/two-women-delivering-newspapers-sought-by-lapd-after-being-mistaken-for-christopher-dorner/"]Ref[/url] [quote]n Torrance, California, two women delivering newspapers were shot by LAPD officers looking for triple murder suspect Christopher Dorner. Maggie Carranza, 47, and her 71-year-old mother Emma Hernandez looked nothing like the African-American male suspect but police insisted that they were driving a Toyota Tundra pickup truck similar to Dorner’s truck. They were in their truck when they were shot by LAPD officers guarding a high-ranking LAPD officer named in Dorner’s manifesto. Their attorney said that there were no warnings before the truck was peppered with bullets. Hernandez was shot in the back.[/quote]

'We recently gained some information on the suspect... He has bad dandruff, wears double denim and listens to nickelback. Easy target.'

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;41101749]Not even disability? That's like the easiest fucking way to find someone. "HE HAD A ROBOT HAND SO I THINK HE WAS AN AMPUTEE! JEEZ JENKINS WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING WE CANT GO OFF OF THAT."[/QUOTE] Dem wheelchair crims.

"The suspect.... uh... the suspect is human"

prevents them from using race/gender/etc [quote] as the determinative factor in initiating law enforcement action against an individual[/quote] has nothing to do with how a person is described. the posts in this thread so far are unbelievable. READ, people. NYPD cheif is purposely misinterpreting it because now they can get attacked legally for discrimination, he's making it out to do something it doesn't

[QUOTE=Vedicardi;41105334]making it out to do something it doesn't[/QUOTE] Where have I heard this before

Let's take more and more away from the police until eventually they have water guns and can't do shit. This is just going to lead to endless bullshit from criminals yelling Discrimination, which they do anyway, only now it'll just be taken under consideration even if its clearly bullshit

This isn't making it illegal to call in, "We're after an African American, Twenty Year old, Male, be advised." It's making it illegal to, "Oh, a twenty year old, black guy in a ghetto, must be buying weed. Frisk him."

[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;41105434]This isn't making it illegal to call in, "We're after an African American, Twenty Year old, Male, be advised." It's making it illegal to, "Oh, a twenty year old, black guy in a ghetto, must be buying weed. Frisk him."[/QUOTE] Literally no one calls in suspect information like that