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

Skip to comments.

How Profiling Saved My Life
Front Page Magazine ^ | 16 December 2003 | Nicholas Stix

Posted on 12/16/2003 10:27:55 AM PST by mrustow

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
To: jaugust
My previous was also intended for Cyborg...
21 posted on 12/16/2003 11:14:35 AM PST by jaugust ("You have the mind of a four year-old boy and he's probably glad he got rid of it". ---Groucho!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jaugust
"Andin this guy's case he and his friends were UNDERAGE. Any police officer worth his salt is going to stop and wonder why UNDERAGE kids are hanging out late at night with no parental supervision. And thank G-d they do!"

Depends on the laws. Is there a curfew? If so, then the kids are violating the law if it's after curfew. If not, then there's no law against them hanging out.

Where are they? Half a block from their homes? Five miles? In the summertime, all of us kids hung out as late as we could, since there was no air conditioning in our homes back then. Were we "thugs?" No police ever bothered us.

If no laws are being broken, then there's no justifiable reason to "break up" a group of kids. If they're breaking the law, then arrest them.
22 posted on 12/16/2003 11:17:26 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
This is FR where the knee jerk response to whining civil rights people is to think that black kids are criminals and take away the rights of the people they think are committing the majority of the crimes.
23 posted on 12/16/2003 11:18:26 AM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
Did you miss the fact that this author is white, and the group he was with on that street corner was white? and the year was 1971, when teen-agers were expected to be home at a reasonable hour?

Do you remember the TV Ad: "Parents, it is eleven pm. Do you know where your children are?"
24 posted on 12/16/2003 11:18:59 AM PST by maica (Laus Deo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mrustow
I believe this has already been posted.
25 posted on 12/16/2003 11:20:41 AM PST by general_re (Knife goes in, guts come out! That's what Osaka Food Concern is all about!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maica
So? Where were his parents? Obviously his parents weren't doing their job.
26 posted on 12/16/2003 11:21:15 AM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: maica
"Did you miss the fact that this author is white, and the group he was with on that street corner was white? and the year was 1971, when teen-agers were expected to be home at a reasonable hour?

Do you remember the TV Ad: "Parents, it is eleven pm. Do you know where your children are?""

No, and I didn't miss it either. It was 9PM. Not 11PM. In my town, where I was a teenager in the 1960's (early), we had a curfew. It was set at 10PM. After curfew, the cops could and did run us off and send us home, but my parents insisted that I be home then anyhow.

What's the curfew law where this all happened?

Again, if the kids didn't break any laws, what is the justification for the police bothering them in any way? Nobody's answered that question yet.
27 posted on 12/16/2003 11:25:44 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
I remember hanging out with my friends on the street corner, too. We weren't thugs. We were just kids. I guess we were never bothered because we were white, eh?

Musta been a dunkin donuts in your 'hood, cause the police were always on top of us white kids in mine.

A police force who doesn't break up groups of 'young people' congregating in the street after hours isn't fit to carry a badge.

28 posted on 12/16/2003 11:26:08 AM PST by skeeter (Fac ut vivas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jaugust
Underage depends upon local laws. If they weren't supposed to be out because of curfew and/or other local laws then what were his parents up to?
29 posted on 12/16/2003 11:26:51 AM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: skeeter
"A police force who doesn't break up groups of 'young people' congregating in the street after hours isn't fit to carry a badge"

What is "after hours?" In my town in the early 60's, curfew was at 10 PM. Until then, we hung out outdoors. After that, we were at home. Define "after hours."
30 posted on 12/16/2003 11:27:33 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
"The right of underage thieves to peaceably assemble at all hours of the night shall not be abridged." Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you! I'd forgotten all about that codicil to the BoR."

Thieves? I didn't see that in the article. Were they stealing stuff while hanging out? Or were they just hanging out and you assume their thieves?

When it becomes illegal to gather on the street corner for some black kids, it will become equally illegal for you.

How much of the article did you catch, in your skimming? If you had read it, you would know that the author never said that white kids had a right that black kids were denied.

And no, black kids do not have the same rights I have, any more than white kids do. There's huge legal difference between being a minor and being an adult. Your failure to grasp that, may explain why you talk like a wannabe lawyer who is as ignorant of the law as he is of morality.

31 posted on 12/16/2003 11:27:38 AM PST by mrustow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Again, if the kids didn't break any laws, what is the justification for the police bothering them in any way? Nobody's answered that question yet.

*** Don't hold your breath.
32 posted on 12/16/2003 11:28:02 AM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
Maybe he wasn't worried because he thought he'd get off BECAUSE he was white.

Another skimmer. Show where the author said anything remotely like that.

33 posted on 12/16/2003 11:29:49 AM PST by mrustow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mrustow
"There's huge legal difference between being a minor and being an adult. Your failure to grasp that, may explain why you talk like a wannabe lawyer who is as ignorant of the law as he is of morality."

I grasp the law just fine. Most communities and cities have some sort of curfew law for minors. If the kids are breaking it, then the police have something to do. If they're not, and they're not breaking any other laws, then the police have nothing to do. You want a law prohibiting minors from congregating together on the street? Then pass one, but I guarantee it won't stand up in court, thanks to our Bill of Rights. You want a curfew? Then pass such a law and enforce it.

34 posted on 12/16/2003 11:30:23 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
"*** SOOOOOO we need the nanny police state not parents to teach kids to behave."

Well, yes...that seems to be what the article is saying. Just one more incursion into our rights, it seems to me.

So, you're yet another genius who fails to distinguish between the rights of minors and those of adults. Do you have kids? Do you poor your children glasses of liquor? Smoke joints with them? Give your 12-year-old the keys to your car?

35 posted on 12/16/2003 11:32:14 AM PST by mrustow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mrustow
I read the article. I'm not a skimmer. I used to work in a department store where white kids who got arrested for shoplifting would expect to get off because they were white.
36 posted on 12/16/2003 11:33:41 AM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Kay Soze
Your "profiled" during each visit to the Doctor/Hospital.

When was the last time they checked for sickle cell anemia on w white guy?

Or conversely did not check for it on a black guy?

The DNC profiles for donors every day.

Thank you! But then, you've got way too much common sense for some folks on this thread. I supposed they'd tell black folks to sue for being checked for sickle cell (but not the Jew of Eastern European descent who gets profiled for Tay-Sachs).

37 posted on 12/16/2003 11:34:20 AM PST by mrustow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cyborg
This is entirely different than stopping someone based upon a suspect description, such as one given when a robbery occurs. I think most rational people understand that. What most people, esp black people, do not appreciate is being MADE a suspect wherever they go based upon their appearance such as what's going on in this article.

Oh, aren't you wonderfully enlightened! Your self-esteem must be through the roof. Watch out, that you don't stroke out! Now, go to the article, and find the passage that said that black kids should be treated differently than white kids. Because if you can't find such a passage -- and you can't, you have utterly misrepresented the article. Now, back to your cave.

38 posted on 12/16/2003 11:37:35 AM PST by mrustow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dighton
Another stinker from Stix.
39 posted on 12/16/2003 11:37:49 AM PST by general_re (Knife goes in, guts come out! That's what Osaka Food Concern is all about!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrustow
"So, you're yet another genius who fails to distinguish between the rights of minors and those of adults. Do you have kids? Do you poor your children glasses of liquor? Smoke joints with them? Give your 12-year-old the keys to your car?"

No, I distinguish quite clearly between the rights of minors and thos of adults. Where there are laws restricting minors, such as curfew laws, the police have a reason for action.

As far as I can see in this article, I see no reference to such laws.

Lacking any specific laws, then the police have no business bothering groups of kids hanging out in public. None. While kids do have some altered rights in this country, they also have the right to assemble, just as adults do.

To restrict that right, a law must have good cause to restrict it. Curfew laws for minors are generally upheld by the courts, but laws which restrict the right of assembly for minors without some good cause are justifiably thrown out by the courts.

Again, I ask: What laws are these kids breaking by hanging out on the street? If you cannot answer, then you have no justifiable reason for the police to break up such groups, black, white, tan, or any other color.

What laws are a group of kids hanging out breaking? Name them. Curfew? OK...I have no problem with curfew laws. They make a lot of sense. Or is it that you just don't like looking at groups of dusky kids hanging out on the street?

Sorry, but that won't wash in the United States of America.
40 posted on 12/16/2003 11:39:06 AM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next 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