Skip to comments.New York Democrats Want to Ban Police From Describing Suspects By Race, Sex, or Age
Posted on 06/19/2013 6:57:32 PM PDT by Hojczyk
New York Dems want to pass a bill that would limit a description of a suspect to identify suspects essentially by the clothes they wear only. Truly mind-numbing stupidity.
NYPost reports the following:
Cops might as well wear blindfolds if the City Council passes a bill that would let them use little more than the color of a suspects clothing in descriptions or risk being sued for profiling, according to this provocative new ad (pictured) from the NYPD captains union.
The ad asks, How effective is a police officer with a blindfold on?
And the answer is not very, says the NYPD Captains Endowment Association, which is fighting the measure, claiming it would handcuff cops and send crime rates soaring.
Union President Roy Richter who is seen in the ad wearing a blindfold in Times Square told The Post the bill is dangerous because it will ban cops from identifying a suspects age, gender, color or disability.
When we have wanted suspects and patterns of crimes, those are very important descriptive terms to let officers know who to look for.
The ad warns that if cops transmit a description of a suspect that goes beyond the color of his or her clothing, they could be sued for racial profiling if the proposal becomes law.
The ad will appear in tomorrows Post, in addition to the unions Web site, Twitter and Facebook and provides links to contacts for City Council members to sway their vote on the measure.
The bills sponsor, Jumaane Williams (D-Brooklyn), and Speaker Christine Quinn are
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
It’s the government at every level and those in it pushing all this government insanity...Not your private sector neighbors or those in the next state. Ya think the good people in NY don’t think this is just more government lunacy?
Um, probably not. Could make one-legged crooks feel bad.
Drunk anthropoid wearing a hoodie.
No, I don't.
They don't REALLY, get how insane it is. If they did, they would vote these people out of office.
But they don't. They keep re-electing them.
I think some people in Wisconsin and Michigan finally woke up, they changed parties and direction. But New Yorkers? Nope.
Out of 51 members of the New York City Council, 46 of them are Democrats. How many of them will vote for this insanity and not face a serious challenger in the next election?
That's why I think that the people of New York City don't "get it".
Suspect is a human being wearing a red hoodie.
When only Amish are suspects, noone will suspect the Amish.
LOL, and I didn’t mention someone on crutches or in wheelchairs and then there are those on dialyzes machines
or those traveling abroad. The mentally handicapped, can I say that? The height challenged. The deaf, dumb (can you still say that?) and blind. People who stutter, who have turrets, ADHAD and the plain stupid. I apologize to all those I left out.
“be on the lookout for a suspicious looking person.”
Well if the rapist was smart, he would wear no clothes.
Thus, no description.
I think it is discriminatory that they still would allow the police to use height and weight.
They should just tell the police to be on the lookout for a human being. That should narrow the search down enough.
And when they do line ups, they should prohibit the police from showing the faces to the victims. They should only be able to identify them by their sense of smell.
Can we identify them by voting history, or is that a given?
Idiocy on steroids.
Not touching that one!
So if Miss Swan became a NYC police officer, she couldn’t even say “he look-a like a man”
Way more instantly recognizable.
“Dispatch, we’re in pursuit of a full featured humanoid — over.”
FOTFLMAO. No you cannot say any of that. Not bald either.
This is not only conceptually idiotic, but it reflects a poor understanding of the terminology.
Profiling is done before-the-fact, not after. In other words, profiling would be along the lines of “This type of person may be likely to commit a crime.” That’s a far different thing from “This type of person committed a crime.”
Baltimore City has been using a number designation for race for decades.
1 = Asian
2 = Black
3 = Caucasian
Most description broadcasts are for “a number two male”.
I don't really care.
...I don't live anywhere near New York...
“Number two” is often used to describe something else...
I am extremely convinced a Democrat has a short-circuit somewhere in their brain. They simply cannot be that ridiculous after a little thought.