# Stop and Frisk **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 13, 2013, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131 "2013-08-13T14:23:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2013, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/61 "2013-08-16T01:42:47Z")
> [@camille](#): > > This isn’t a [finding of intentional discrimination](http://news.yahoo.com/bloomberg-nyc-appeal-stop-frisk-ruling-180925966.html)? No. Ignoring a disparate racial impact is not the same as _seeking_ one under existing federal constitutional jurisprudence. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2013, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/62 "2013-08-16T05:03:10Z")
> [@D\_Odds](#): > > I forget…are Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Kelly liberals or conservatives? > > They both support strong, restrictive gun laws (liberal). They both strongly support stop & frisk (conservative). > > I get so confused when my round pegs don’t fit in my square holes. Supporting restrictive gun laws and stop and frisk are not liberal or conservative views - they are authoritarian. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2013, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/63 "2013-08-16T05:07:12Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Supporting restrictive gun laws and stop and frisk are not liberal or conservative views Sure they are. You can push those ideas off the left-right scale if you like, but it doesn’t really change anything with regard to who supports them and who doesn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2013, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/64 "2013-08-16T07:02:47Z")
The idea i didnt phrase well was that in Bloomberg’s case to be internally consistent his agenda for both shouldn’t be seen as liberal/conservative but rather as an authoritarian one. He is attempting to accrue more and more power to the State in terms of being able to control people’s lives. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2013, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/65 "2013-08-16T07:17:17Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Sure they are. You can push those ideas off the left-right scale if you like, but it doesn’t really change anything with regard to who supports them and who doesn’t. Well actually, conservatives do have a history of supporting restrictive gun laws - towards people they consider enemies. Like blacks, or conquered foreigners like the Iraqis. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2013, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/66 "2013-08-16T13:52:46Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > The idea i didnt phrase well was that in Bloomberg’s case to be internally consistent his agenda for both shouldn’t be seen as liberal/conservative but rather as an authoritarian one. He is attempting to accrue more and more power to the State in terms of being able to control people’s lives. That still misses the point, though. His goal is dealing with these issues as he sees fit, not amassing more power for the state. New York had restrictive gun laws long before Bloomberg showed up. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2013, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/67 "2013-08-16T15:10:29Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > That still misses the point, though. His goal is dealing with these issues as he sees fit, not amassing more power for the state. New York had restrictive gun laws long before Bloomberg showed up. And they will still be here long after he’s gone. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2013, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/68 "2013-08-16T22:18:03Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > That still misses the point, though. His goal is dealing with these issues as he sees fit, not amassing more power for the state. New York had restrictive gun laws long before Bloomberg showed up. New York had restrictive gun laws before Bloomberg, and they continue largely at a state rather than city level. He is the lead of MAIG however, and he specifically pushes the agenda forward. In any case, yes he is dealing with various issues as he sees fit, by restricting soda purchases, or through a campaign to detain mass people on the street for whatever reason or no reason. It is all made possible by an increasingly authoritarian State (city). I’m sure there are other areas of people’s lives that Bloomberg would like to control as well (not this thread) but in the case of stop and frisk, it’s clear he falls on the security side of the security/liberty scale. Is there any doubt he’d be for a stronger police state if he could get away with it? He’s probably not on the verge of demanding everyone’s papers. Probably. I would call his position on stop and frisk authoritarian, rather than conservative. That was my point. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2013, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/69 "2013-08-16T22:35:28Z")
> [@lawbuff](#): > > A federal Judge ruled NYC’s use of the TERRY stop was based on profiling. Bloomberg vows to appeal. The judge is a total idiot. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2013, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/70 "2013-08-17T00:09:50Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > The judge is a total idiot. The judge does seem to have the evidence on her side. If the police were finding more criminal contraband in the possession of non-whites, then you could make the argument that the higher rate of non-whites being stopped and frisked was justified by the objective facts. A higher rate of being criminals justifies a higher rate of being suspects. But that’s not what happened. Whites were found to have more criminal contraband on their persons than non-whites but non-whites were being stopped and frisked more often than whites. This indicates than the police were not following objective facts but were basing their decisions on their subjective beliefs about race. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2013, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/71 "2013-08-17T00:48:59Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > The judge does seem to have the evidence on her side. If the police were finding more criminal contraband in the possession of non-whites, then you could make the argument that the higher rate of non-whites being stopped and frisked was justified by the objective facts. A higher rate of being criminals justifies a higher rate of being suspects. Somewhat, but walking around isn’t enough to make someone a suspect by itself. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2013, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/72 "2013-08-17T00:51:52Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > The judge is a total idiot. Why? ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2013, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131/73 "2013-08-17T16:17:11Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Why? Because **clothahum** said so. That should be self-evident by now. [This](http://gothamist.com/2013/08/13/six_outrageous_arguments_made_by_bl.php) is a local paper’s take on some of the comments that came out of mayor’s office on this decision. It is worth reading for anyone at least vaguely interested in the underlying issues. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stop-and-frisk/666131.md?page=3)