Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New York Times Slanders NYPD Officer, Shamefully Distorts Stop-and-Frisk Policy
National Review ^ | 03/25/2013 | By Heather Mac Donald

Posted on 03/25/2013 7:02:51 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

A fiendishly deceptive article about the New York Police Department in the New York Times has set back the cause of public safety not just in New York but nationally. A front-page story on Friday twisted a police commander’s exhortation to an underperforming officer to work harder against crime into an injunction to target blacks on the basis of race. The commander’s statements were captured on a tape secretly recorded by the officer and replayed last Thursday during a federal racial-profiling trial directed against the New York Police Department’s stop, question, and frisk policy. The officer had already joined the lawsuit when he made the recording and was patently trying to goad the commander into making a statement that could be used in the litigation. As I explain here, Officer Pedro Serrano failed in his effort to elicit anything remotely approaching a racial-profiling mandate from Deputy Inspector Christopher McCormack, who is shown in the recording to be fiercely committed to protecting the overwhelmingly black and Hispanic residents of his South Bronx precinct and who explicitly repudiates stopping people on the basis of race, rather than criminal behavior. It didn’t matter. The Times finished the job for Serrano, making it seem that McCormack had said the opposite of what he had actually said. (Readers can now compare the Times account of the episode with the actual transcript and decide for themselves.)

Just to make sure that the damage was irrevocable, the Times followed up the next day with an editorial that was even more duplicitous than the article on which it was based. Titled “Walking While Black in New York,” the editorial strips whatever meager context the Friday article had included that might have allowed a highly determined reader to hazily glimpse the truth behind the Times’ distortions: that McCormack was referring to an ongoing, local string of robberies perpetrated by young male blacks when he responded to Serrano’s increasingly aggressive racial provocations with the phrases: “The problem was, what, male blacks. And I told you at roll call, and I have no problem telling you this, [the problem was] male blacks 14 to 20, 21.” It is perfectly appropriate to mention suspects’ race when police are looking for actual perpetrators who have been identified by their victims, but “Walking While Black” displays a breathtakingly juvenile determination to eliminate all facts that stand in the way of the all-consuming agenda to demonize the police.

If the Times honored its by now-dubious status as the newspaper of record, it would run a correction. But even if it did, it would come too late to help the police. Sharpton, the NAACP, and the ACLU are labeling McCormack’s remarks the NYPD’s “smoking gun” and are calling for his suspension, despite his strong backing from the actual residents of the South Bronx. But this is about more than one hard-working commander’s slandered reputation or the ability of the NYPD to preserve its record-breaking crime drop. The conceit that McCormack has revealed the truth about proactive policing will become gospel in anti-cop circles nationwide, making it even harder for police everywhere to do their jobs, due to political pressure from above and street resistance from below.

On March 6 of this year, I attended a community council meeting in the NYPD’s 40th Precinct, where Deputy Inspector McCormack presides. A former Marine named Duwon urgently called for more vigorous policing. He travels to the Bronx from Brooklyn to escort his mother to cash her Social Security payments, he said, because she is terrified of the addicts and youth milling on the corners. “If she ever fell, they’d pick her dry,” he observed.

The Times’ writers and publishers will likely not notice much of a difference (at least initially) if the current campaign against New York’s stop, question, and frisk policy succeeds. Times staffers overwhelmingly live in safe neighborhoods where shootings are merely theoretical. But law-abiding residents of inner-city neighborhoods know that effective policing is a life-and-death matter, and thus passionately support law enforcement. The NYPD works around the clock to provide upstanding members of poor communities the same freedom from fear that affluent areas take for granted. The Times’ preposterous conceit of “walking while black” will only widen the crime gap that, despite the NYPD’s unmatched success in fighting crime, still separates the cozy enclaves of white liberals and the hard streets that continue to blight too many striving inner-city lives.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; US: New York
KEYWORDS: newyork; nypd; stopandfrisk; times
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-97 last
To: Zhang Fei
A police state is one where people are sent to a gulag or worse for merely complaining about their daily lives. NYC is merely clamping down on criminals in a way that poses an inconvenience to innocent civilians whose time is wasted.

So if they search my attic and don't find any Jews, its just an inconvenience, not a police state.

You either have a right as an American to be free or you don't. An illegal search is not just a matter of inconveniencing the innocent, it is a matter of making them insecure in their person and possessions.

The effectiveness of anti-crime measures is not a measure of their Constitutionality.

51 posted on 03/25/2013 9:14:59 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate

It uses FBI data.

If you throw in cities which are close to 1 million there are several more added. San Antonio is only slightly higher and it has the significant impact of being close to the border.

But seriously, you folks must really approve of the job Bloomberg is doing.


52 posted on 03/25/2013 9:22:39 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rudabaga
And their claim that it has lowered crime is also a joke. They claim this by including all of the completely bogus little tickets they hand out to reach their quotas for things like blocking the sidewalk (because they are being stopped by the cops!), or any number of other BS reasons they make up.

The crime stats - which are composed of robberies, thefts, rapes, homicides and so on - have nothing to do with ticket-writing.

53 posted on 03/25/2013 9:24:55 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

No it isn’t Mayberry, it also isn’t a free city.

Crimes occur in every state all the time. Is that justification to elimination of all rights in America?


54 posted on 03/25/2013 9:32:18 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
If you throw in cities which are close to 1 million there are several more added. San Antonio is only slightly higher and it has the significant impact of being close to the border.

Crime-wise, San Antonio has superior demographics - only 6.9% of the population is black compared to NYC's 25%. Adjusted for age, Hispanics commit crimes at about the same rate as whites, compared to the black rate of 6x the white rate.

55 posted on 03/25/2013 9:32:24 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Dictators always have an excuse.


56 posted on 03/25/2013 9:34:01 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: allendale

Stop and frisk is clearly unconstitutional. Go read the 4th. It’s pretty simple.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Law and order “conservatives” have always hated the 4th. Until it is them or their family being harrased by LEO.

So read it. Not difficult to understand. You just don’t like what it says.p


57 posted on 03/25/2013 9:38:31 AM PDT by DariusBane (Liberty and Risk. Flip sides of the same coin. So how much risk will YOU accept?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

Nine political appointees who take a Gubment check want to expand Gubment power. Read the 4th, nnot hard to understand.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


58 posted on 03/25/2013 9:40:54 AM PDT by DariusBane (Liberty and Risk. Flip sides of the same coin. So how much risk will YOU accept?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Crimes occur in every state all the time. Is that justification to elimination of all rights in America?

Being stopped and searched on the street doesn't seem to have affected habeas corpus or freedom of speech in New York City. No New Yorker has been sent to a gulag for criticizing Bloomberg. That I know of, anyway...

While it would be ideal if the Second Amendment rights of all New Yorkers were restored, the reality is that New Yorkers have to live in a city where only criminals are armed. Until New Yorkers recover their right to carry personal weapons, their only recourse is to insist on a level playing field, such that criminals are disarmed via stop-and-frisk.

59 posted on 03/25/2013 9:40:55 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

So you’ve willingly surrendered your rights. And we wonder why people like Bloomberg keep getting elected.

New Yorkers are certainly NOT raising a ruckus about the gun laws there. Not the city dwellers anyway, the upstate area where actual conservatives live have tried but are simply outnumbered.


60 posted on 03/25/2013 9:43:38 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Dictators always have an excuse.

What you call an excuse, many would simply note as a statistical truth. Your allergy to numbers does not obviate the truths behind those numbers. Black majority countries have the worst homicide rates in the world. Thailand and Jamaica have roughly the same GDP per capita, but Jamaica has 10x Thailand's per capita murder rate. Demographics are a major factor in crime rates.

61 posted on 03/25/2013 9:47:34 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Racists love to throw numbers around. Crime is usually a cultural thing and not a skin color.


62 posted on 03/25/2013 9:49:52 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

So, let me get this straight. I’m walking down the street in N.Y. A cop sees me and starts asking me a bunch of questions. I refuse to answer so he puts me up against the nearest car, wall, post, fence and starts putting his hands on me. Under my arms, down the sides, feeling inside my waistband, grabbing my crotch, running his hands down my legs. And this is somehow OK with you?


63 posted on 03/25/2013 9:53:02 AM PDT by saleman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
RE: Why is stop and frisk a good thing?

Well, apparently it has been responsible for the dramatic drop in crime in NYC. Crime rates are at its lowest since the 1960’s and NYC is arguably one of the safest big cities in the world.

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams

This question is not whether Stop and Frisk is effective or not or unconstitutional or not. (Of course its effective and, of course, its totally unconstitutional.)

The question should be: Do we want to live among people that are unwilling or unable to act civilized in a free country and so dangerous and disruptive that we must abandon the Constitution to maintain a semblance of order.

64 posted on 03/25/2013 9:57:48 AM PDT by Count of Monte Fisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

And you believe them that stopping and frisking millions of people is the reason for lowering the stats on those felonies? You probably believe in CompStat too.


65 posted on 03/25/2013 10:03:01 AM PDT by rudabaga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
So you’ve willingly surrendered your rights.

Not willingly, but the reality is conservatives are outnumbered and your friends, family and job are where they are. It is therefore necessary to make the necessary compromises required to secure life and property against those who conspire against them. And it's not that big a compromise. The rest of the constitution's freedoms are not yet in peril. Note that NYC's gun laws have been around 100 years, and the city is still free.

66 posted on 03/25/2013 10:06:16 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

One of the unbelievable things in my life, is that I come to this site almost everyday. Supposedly “Conservative”. Bound by the Constitution. And yet day after day there are those here who will support, hell cheer, the erosion of our rights. It makes me sick. If there is this much opposition here on Free Republic, then how can I believe that someday the Sheeple will wake up and take back this country.

So, you are barking up the wrong tree. Here’s an idea. Next time you see a thread on DUI roadblocks just chime in with some 4th amendment claims. You’ll be called a drunk. A murderer. A child killer. And if you are lucky you’ll get a mailbox full calling you things that can’t be read in public.

So, lot’s of luck.


67 posted on 03/25/2013 10:07:48 AM PDT by saleman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

“Note that NYC’s gun laws have been around 100 years, and the city is still free.”

WHAT!!!

You can’t even buy whatever size softdrink you want. You can be searched without probable cause. You can’t exercise your rights R.E. the second amendment and on and on.

You are confusing freedom with security.


68 posted on 03/25/2013 10:11:37 AM PDT by saleman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Thanks for your exposition. But, really, so what? So some judges said a bad law is still the law. Color me unimpressed.

It's still an unconstitutional and immoral policy based on an unconstitutional and immoral "law". It's also mostly used to enforce another unconstitutional set of laws, those repressing the rights of the people to keep and bear arms.

When the Constitution is outlawed Constitutionalists will be outlaws.

69 posted on 03/25/2013 10:13:23 AM PDT by Jack Black ( Whatever is left of American patriotism is now identical with counter-revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Racists love to throw numbers around.

Football and basketball must feature a lot of anti-white racism. Or it may simply be that blacks are just better at those sports, for whatever reason.

Crime is usually a cultural thing and not a skin color.

While there may be a cultural aspect, a big part of it is race. Why that's the case, who knows? It is what it is. African culture has nothing in common with black American culture but homicide rates in Africa are nonetheless stratospheric.

70 posted on 03/25/2013 10:14:30 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: saleman
And yet day after day there are those here who will support, hell cheer, the erosion of our rights.

I don't see where you're getting the part about NYC conservatives being cheerful about this. It's not their preference that gun-grabbers dominate in NYC - stop-and-frisk is merely their compromise solution to the fact that the only armed civilians in NYC are criminals.

71 posted on 03/25/2013 10:21:09 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
Being stopped and searched on the street doesn't seem to have affected habeas corpus or freedom of speech in New York City. No New Yorker has been sent to a gulag for criticizing Bloomberg. That I know of, anyway...

You have an odd notion that a police state doesn't exist until people are arrested for dissent. First, if I refuse to be stopped and frisked, that is dissent, and I would be arrested, no?

That said, a police state exists when your free actions are unreasonably constrained by the power of the state. It doesn't matter whether the state's intentions are good or bad. Of course, a good king is better than a bad king, but that should not be the choice presented to free peoples.

72 posted on 03/25/2013 10:23:40 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Oh. I didn’t realize New York City conservatives had a say in this. Actually, I didn’t realize there were enough conservatives in N.Y. to make that much of a difference. I guess I should thank them for making sure the minorities don’t take over from the good folks.


73 posted on 03/25/2013 10:24:08 AM PDT by saleman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

You are lobbying for the unconstitutional laws

You are part of the problem.


74 posted on 03/25/2013 10:29:01 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

You’re a racist who supports unconstitutional laws.

The cultures in many parts of Africa are dysfunctional because the cultures were destroyed in the 1700s and 1800s.

I’m done with ya.


75 posted on 03/25/2013 10:33:45 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
You have an odd notion that a police state doesn't exist until people are arrested for dissent.

You can obviously define words to mean whatever you want them to mean. However, in common discourse, the phrase "police state" has a very definite meaning that does not incorporate most developed countries, where routine street-level weapon searches by the police are not only legal - they are standard police procedure.

76 posted on 03/25/2013 10:45:23 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
You’re a racist who supports unconstitutional laws. The cultures in many parts of Africa are dysfunctional because the cultures were destroyed in the 1700s and 1800s.

I think the word you're looking for is "improved". However, even improvements in culture can only accomplish so much.

77 posted on 03/25/2013 10:48:23 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: saleman
Oh. I didn’t realize New York City conservatives had a say in this. Actually, I didn’t realize there were enough conservatives in N.Y. to make that much of a difference. I guess I should thank them for making sure the minorities don’t take over from the good folks.

They do - by voting for the lesser of two evils in Democratic primaries. And by voting for the lesser of two evils in the mayoral election - Bloomberg and Giuliani before him.

78 posted on 03/25/2013 10:50:58 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

For example the Dutch took over a large portion of central Africa in the 1700-1800s (roughly). He set up work camps, (aka slave camps) and worked everyone killing thousands upon thousands.

I guess I can see how a racist would see that as an improvement.


79 posted on 03/25/2013 10:51:24 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

“where routine street-level weapon searches by the police are not only legal - they are standard police procedure.”

Ironically, I think in you’re explanation on what a police state is and is not, you just defined “police state”


80 posted on 03/25/2013 10:52:05 AM PDT by saleman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
However, in common discourse, the phrase "police state" has a very definite meaning that does not incorporate most developed countries, where routine street-level weapon searches by the police are not only legal - they are standard police procedure.

Wrong, in common discourse, that is the very definition of a police state.

81 posted on 03/25/2013 10:53:11 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

How do you feel about internal passports and being greeted with, “Show me your papers!” a few times every day?

You have a disappointingly high tolerance for tyranny. If it isn’t too awfully instrusive and makes you feel safer, you appear to be OK with most any intrusion.

Good Germans didn’t really have to worry about the Gestapo, did they? It was a bit of a hassle to be stopped, but it brought a high level of order to society, only affecting those that everyone agreed were a problem, so where was the harm?


82 posted on 03/25/2013 11:01:36 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
You’re a racist who supports unconstitutional laws. The cultures in many parts of Africa are dysfunctional because the cultures were destroyed in the 1700s and 1800s. I’m done with ya.

You're also making a point that is orthogonal to the topic. Let's say their crime rates are stratospheric for cultural reasons. Are you the deux ex machina, the Hand of God, that will change their cultural predilections? It is what it is - we deal with the world as it is, not how we'd like it to be. The stats are pretty straightforward - regardless of cultural influences, whether Anglo-Saxon, Lusitanian (i.e. in black majority Brazil) or African, black populations tend to have far higher homicide rates than those of other races.

My speculative theory is that high level of criminality among blacks has to do with the relatively short duration of civilization in black Africa, meaning that hunter gatherers who saw other humans as prey got to propagate themselves, whereas in more established civilizations, where even petty thieves were executed or exiled pretty much right until the end of the 18th century, only the genes of those who played well with other humans survived until the present age. The wonderful thing about the modern welfare state is that where in the pre-welfare past, criminals generally failed to pass on their genes, now it's the law-abiding of all races who fail to do so.

83 posted on 03/25/2013 11:08:11 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: saleman
Ironically, I think in you’re explanation on what a police state is and is not, you just defined “police state”

By your definition, every country outside of these United States is a police state.

84 posted on 03/25/2013 11:10:37 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
How do you feel about internal passports and being greeted with, “Show me your papers!” a few times every day?

I don't understand these theoretical constructs. New York City elects its politicians. In police states, the citizenry has no say over its leaders, no ability to influence legislation short of violent revolution and no idea what the actual laws are, since most of them are a state secret, simply to avoid the kind of nickel-and-diming that citizens of a city like New York can get up to in trying to get around the spirit of the law.

85 posted on 03/25/2013 11:18:16 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
“By your definition, every country outside of these United States is a police state.”

Every country outside the U.S. doesn't have the Constitution of the U.S. protecting it's citizens against an overzealous government. I live here. I'll let citizens of other countries worry about their rights.

86 posted on 03/25/2013 11:25:30 AM PDT by saleman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
I don't understand these theoretical constructs.

Being asked for "your papers" is hardly different from stop and frisk.

New York City elects its politicians. In police states, the citizenry has no say over its leaders...

Wrong. Many police states have the consent of the majority. Hitler won overwhelmingly in a general plebiscite, and was quite popular with the majority of Germans, while the minority was being exterminated.

Democracy is not mutually exclusive from tyranny, and most certainly no protector of the minority rights.

You have a very basic misunderstanding of what rights are. The concept of natural rights, as enumerated in the Constitution, protect people from tyranny, which in its most common form is instituted and enforced by the majority.

87 posted on 03/25/2013 11:35:09 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
You have a disappointingly high tolerance for tyranny. If it isn’t too awfully instrusive and makes you feel safer, you appear to be OK with most any intrusion. Good Germans didn’t really have to worry about the Gestapo, did they? It was a bit of a hassle to be stopped, but it brought a high level of order to society, only affecting those that everyone agreed were a problem, so where was the harm?

You have a pretty unconventional definition of tyranny. Hyperbole aside, tyranny is not a word to be used casually. Heck, I'd say the Founding Fathers used it a bit recklessly. If King George were truly a tyrant, then the proper course of action for the Patriots was to bring the war to Mother England or at the very least, liberate the Canadian provinces from British rule at any cost. What did they actually do? They resumed trade with Mother England just about as soon as they could.

All this long-winded navel-gazing psychoanalytical fluff about the German mind is, in my view, beside the point. Ultimately, the Germans decided to revert to the rules of war used by the Vikings during which captives were enslaved or killed depending on the whim of the captor. It had nothing to do with creeping this or that. The German people were in the grip of the romantic fantasy that they were Vikings reincarnated and that if they conquered the world, they were all going to Valhalla.

88 posted on 03/25/2013 11:36:37 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
You have a pretty unconventional definition of tyranny.

Are you trying to set a record for being wrong on a single thread? You have no concept of rights. None. Every time you post, you demonstrate a total ignorance of what real liberty is.

Hyperbole aside, tyranny is not a word to be used casually. Heck, I'd say the Founding Fathers used it a bit recklessly.

I believe you just stuck a fork in yourself. You have zero regard for the Constitution, natural rights, or your fellow citizens. You just want a nanny state to pat your head and rock you to sleep.

If you are a "NY conservative", then I guess I understand why things suck so much in NYC.

89 posted on 03/25/2013 11:42:56 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
Being asked for "your papers" is hardly different from stop and frisk.

They're actually very different. Stop and frisk is generally carried out in high crime areas. New Yorkers can try to end stop-and-frisk and black and Hispanic race hustlers are in the process of mounting court challenges, in addition to getting City Council members to put up legislation banning the practice. Citizens in police states do not have the ability to influence police procedure and can in fact be imprisoned or executed for merely questioning police procedure.

90 posted on 03/25/2013 11:47:19 AM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
Citizens in police states do not have the ability to influence police procedure and can in fact be imprisoned or executed for merely questioning police procedure.

Wrong, again. What is that, like 20 times now?

You think democracy is all the freedom you need, but democracy only protects the simple majority.

In your world, it is OK to run roughshod over people, just as long as it is in accordance with the wishes of the majority.

91 posted on 03/25/2013 11:53:03 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
For example the Dutch took over a large portion of central Africa in the 1700-1800s (roughly). He set up work camps, (aka slave camps) and worked everyone killing thousands upon thousands. I guess I can see how a racist would see that as an improvement.

And this is different from the rest of African history how? Heck, the Bantu tribes have massacring the pygmies for hundreds of years. Muslim raids on European coasts all the way up to Ireland resulted in the taking of over a million slaves, most of whom were worked to death. Similar raids were mounted by Vikings against Saxons and vice versa. Slave raids, massacres and so on - all are part of the complicated fabric of history. As someone who's read a fair number of Chinese histories (hence the Internet alias Zhang Fei), including by John King Fairbank and Jonathan Spence, I can tell you that every change of dynasty in China involved the deaths of up to half the population as a result of the civil war, partition, foreign invasion, famine and plagues that followed. And they were the lucky ones. Europe had it much worse - with serious conflicts (Hundred Years War, anyone?) and slave raids wiping out ethnic groups and keeping the population at low levels until pretty much the beginning of the renaissance. Note also that the Dutch used similar measures against conquered populations elsewhere, including in Batavia (now Indonesia), and yet African crime rates are many times those in Indonesia.

Ultimately, your issue is denial. What you're missing is that in aggregate, the races are different in the same way that various breeds of dogs are different. While there are slow greyhounds and docile pit bulls, they are the exception to the rule - on average, greyhounds can run really fast and pit bulls are pretty aggressive. Obviously everyone is responsible only for his own actions, but the reality is that a random white stranger is less likely to be a criminal than a random black stranger. This is why Jesse Jackson, in a moment of candor, said that when he's walking on the street at night and hears footsteps behind him, he's generally relieved when he swivels his head and sees a white person. The black colleague you know and like isn't a criminal. But the random black stranger you encounter on the street is 6x more likely to be one than a random white stranger.

92 posted on 03/25/2013 3:20:46 PM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
Wrong, again. What is that, like 20 times now? You think democracy is all the freedom you need, but democracy only protects the simple majority. In your world, it is OK to run roughshod over people, just as long as it is in accordance with the wishes of the majority.

You're entitled to your definition of tyranny. But the reality is that calling someone a tyrant has no consequences in NYC, whereas calling Hitler a tyrant in Nazi Germany would have resulted in arrest, torture and perhaps execution. And that's the difference between actual tyranny and a pale facsimile of the real thing - it's sort of like the difference between terminal cancer and a paper cut.

93 posted on 03/25/2013 3:37:20 PM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

I repeat, you have a very high, unhealthy, and unadmirable tolerance for tyranny.

Apparently, the 4th amendment and the 2nd amendment are expendable for you, because “real rights” aren’t being violated. When Canada imprisons a person for speaking against homosexuals, I’m sure you aren’t troubled at that little “paper cut” in a democratic society. I’m fairly certain that the restrictions that have been put on religious freedom by Obamacare don’t trouble you much, as “we get to vote”, so it’s not really oppression.

Until you have the guts to actually oppose tyranny, you won’t be arrested for resisting it; thus, in your world, tyranny won’t exist.

I might be able to tolerate your position if it weren’t for your whole-hearted willingness to back your little tyrants. I have zero respect for your position on this, as you have zero respect for the natural rights of mankind.

Free people don’t refer to having their persons searched without a warrant, nor probable cause, to be a “paper cut”.

There is term to describe your point of view on accepting such tyranny in the hope of safety and acceptance, it is “Quisling”.


94 posted on 03/25/2013 4:47:18 PM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
I repeat, you have a very high, unhealthy, and unadmirable tolerance for tyranny.

And my contention is that your definition of tyranny is unrecognizable to the vast majority of people in these United States, and bears the same relationship to the real thing as the Bush administration did to what its critics called fascism.

95 posted on 03/25/2013 4:53:47 PM PDT by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

I fully understand your contention. And I thoroughly reject it.

Some people just don’t have the desire to be free.


96 posted on 03/25/2013 5:13:30 PM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Leave it to Heather MacDonald to lick the boots of the Staten Island Cowboys. Sorry, Vinny and Paddy Donut muncher, there is something called a Constitution which your ancestors did nothing to write, but which protects us all.

The judge made the right decision, albeit for the wrong reasons.

97 posted on 08/12/2013 7:20:04 PM PDT by Clemenza ("History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil governm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-97 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson