Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
Author Message
450bench Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 24,801
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 1389
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Memphis
Post: #21
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.
02-13-2020 08:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Claw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 19,335
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 545
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Orangeville HELP!
Post: #22
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.

Where he misses it is not mentioning all the law-abiding people in those areas that deserve their attention. The vast majority of those neighborhoods are law abiding people. They send officers for the law abiding, not for the criminals.
02-13-2020 08:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,665
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 495
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.

Call me crazy here, but if those officers were just patroling those high crime neighborhoods and not frisking over 500k people a year with around 90% of those people having nothing on them just maybe this wouldn't be an issue.
02-13-2020 08:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EverRespect Offline
Free Kaplony
*

Posts: 28,615
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 975
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-13-2020 08:56 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.

Call me crazy here, but if those officers were just patroling those high crime neighborhoods and not frisking over 500k people a year with around 90% of those people having nothing on them just maybe this wouldn't be an issue.
Xactly

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
02-13-2020 08:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,665
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 495
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
I hate to give anyone on MSNBC a bit of credit but Ari Melber just goes in on Bloomy's campaign manager.

https://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari/...8266949653
02-13-2020 09:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
solohawks Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,906
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 394
I Root For: UNCW
Location: Wilmington, NC
Post: #26
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
Everyone smile and say Stop and Frisk


02-14-2020 12:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
200yrs2late Offline
Resident Parrothead
*

Posts: 13,204
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 541
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: SE of disorder
Post: #27
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.
Stop and frisk worked. It was an extreme solution for extreme circumstances that served its purpose and was correctly ended when it was. What Bloomberg described was not stop and frisk. How he describes "all" young minority men is disgusting. What he implies is nothing short of pure racism and a deep seated hatred for minorities in the communities he was in charge of.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
02-14-2020 12:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,206
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1305
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
https://amgreatness.com/2020/02/13/conve...-is-wrong/
Author doesn't buy that Bloomberg can buy the nomination-unless it comes down to him vs. Sanders

"There are three widely proclaimed verities now bandied about in the aftermath of the Democratic presidential primary in New Hampshire on Tuesday.

They are that Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is a clear front-runner with a chance for a break-through to a commanding lead in the quest for the nomination. The second is that former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg is a serious candidate with a chance for the Democratic nomination, and the third is that former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been providentially assisted by the disintegration of the candidacy of former Vice President Joe Biden and the bunching together of Sanders, Buttigieg, and Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and will seize the leadership of the race when he gets to the ballot in 15 states simultaneously on Super Tuesday, March 3.

I think all three of these deductions are mistaken...."


Nobody mentions Biden. While his campaign seems to be imploding, he is still leading in most of the Super Tuesday state polls. 3 polls out yesterday-Biden has big lead in Georgia, 1 point behind Bloomberg in Florida but way ahead of everyone else, 2 points behind Sanders in Texas, but way ahead of everyone else. And nobody mentions Steyer who has crept up to 2nd in South Carolina. I think anybody certain of what will happen doesn't know what they are talking about.
02-14-2020 09:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fo Shizzle Offline
Domestic Terrorist and Iconoclast
*

Posts: 36,591
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 800
I Root For: ECU PIRATES
Location: North Carolina

Balance of Power Contest
Post: #29
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-13-2020 07:50 PM)Claw Wrote:  For a million I could give him a workable answer to that question.

He better pay someone. This issue is not going away.07-coffee3
02-14-2020 09:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fo Shizzle Offline
Domestic Terrorist and Iconoclast
*

Posts: 36,591
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 800
I Root For: ECU PIRATES
Location: North Carolina

Balance of Power Contest
Post: #30
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-13-2020 08:56 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.

Call me crazy here, but if those officers were just patroling those high crime neighborhoods and not frisking over 500k people a year with around 90% of those people having nothing on them just maybe this wouldn't be an issue.

Maybe..but..What about that 10% that did have weapons? Those are the criminals that are causing the issues in the communities. I fully understand that what Bloomberg did goes against search and seizure laws..but..Where communities are suffering from these thugs..Is it a valid response? I'm not sure I disagree with what he did. Id be fine with being frisked if my street became safe again from these criminals.
02-14-2020 10:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,665
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 495
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-14-2020 10:03 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:56 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.

Call me crazy here, but if those officers were just patroling those high crime neighborhoods and not frisking over 500k people a year with around 90% of those people having nothing on them just maybe this wouldn't be an issue.

Maybe..but..What about that 10% that did have weapons? Those are the criminals that are causing the issues in the communities. I fully understand that what Bloomberg did goes against search and seizure laws..but..Where communities are suffering from these thugs..Is it a valid response? I'm not sure I disagree with what he did. Id be fine with being frisked if my street became safe again from these criminals.

It wasn't even 10% that had weapons.

"Beginning in 2007, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) filed a series of Freedom of Information Act requests to get the NYPD’s data on its stop-and-frisk encounters and what was found. In 2012, the NYPD made more than 532,000 stops, each of which could progress to a frisk or to a full search. The police found guns only 715 times.1 In other words, guns were found during 0.1 percent of stops."

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/it-...d-one-gun/

That is a laughably low success rate. Also there 100% is a legal mechanism to properly do "stop and frisk," but it's called a Terry Stop. You can stop and frisk someone legally if the police officer has a "reasonable suspicion" that the person being stopped is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity. Here is the relevant quote on what falls under that.

"The suspicion must be individualized. Suspecting people because they fit into a broad category, such as being in a particular location, being of a particular race or ethnicity, or fitting a profile, are insufficient for reasonable suspicion. However, stop-and-frisk has been validated on the basis of furtive movements; inappropriate attire; carrying suspicious objects such as a television or a pillowcase; vague, nonspecific answers to routine questions; refusal to identify oneself; and appearing to be out of place."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

What's crazy is with how damn vague the bold part is they still couldn't run this policy and fit into those insanely broad and lax terms to conduct a search.
02-14-2020 10:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
THE NC Herd Fan Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,865
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation: 338
I Root For: Marshall
Location: Charlotte
Post: #32
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
The hits keep coming:

Quote:Around July 1993 at the financial data company he founded, Bloomberg allegedly browbeat a saleswoman in front of other employees. He’d just heard that the woman was having trouble finding a nanny, according to the lawsuit.

“It’s a ******* baby! All it does is eat and ****! It doesn’t know the difference between you and anyone else! All you need is some Black, who doesn’t even have to speak English, to rescue it from a burning building!” Bloomberg allegedly shouted.

Michael Bloomberg Nanny Some Black

This must be accurate, it's from HuffPo.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2020 08:37 PM by THE NC Herd Fan.)
02-15-2020 08:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Claw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 19,335
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 545
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Orangeville HELP!
Post: #33
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-14-2020 10:44 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 10:03 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:56 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.

Call me crazy here, but if those officers were just patroling those high crime neighborhoods and not frisking over 500k people a year with around 90% of those people having nothing on them just maybe this wouldn't be an issue.

Maybe..but..What about that 10% that did have weapons? Those are the criminals that are causing the issues in the communities. I fully understand that what Bloomberg did goes against search and seizure laws..but..Where communities are suffering from these thugs..Is it a valid response? I'm not sure I disagree with what he did. Id be fine with being frisked if my street became safe again from these criminals.

It wasn't even 10% that had weapons.

"Beginning in 2007, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) filed a series of Freedom of Information Act requests to get the NYPD’s data on its stop-and-frisk encounters and what was found. In 2012, the NYPD made more than 532,000 stops, each of which could progress to a frisk or to a full search. The police found guns only 715 times.1 In other words, guns were found during 0.1 percent of stops."

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/it-...d-one-gun/

That is a laughably low success rate. Also there 100% is a legal mechanism to properly do "stop and frisk," but it's called a Terry Stop. You can stop and frisk someone legally if the police officer has a "reasonable suspicion" that the person being stopped is or is about to be engaged in criminal activity. Here is the relevant quote on what falls under that.

"The suspicion must be individualized. Suspecting people because they fit into a broad category, such as being in a particular location, being of a particular race or ethnicity, or fitting a profile, are insufficient for reasonable suspicion. However, stop-and-frisk has been validated on the basis of furtive movements; inappropriate attire; carrying suspicious objects such as a television or a pillowcase; vague, nonspecific answers to routine questions; refusal to identify oneself; and appearing to be out of place."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

What's crazy is with how damn vague the bold part is they still couldn't run this policy and fit into those insanely broad and lax terms to conduct a search.

If you think that success rate is laughably low, and it is low, then we can quit screening at the airports. Their rates are lower.
02-15-2020 08:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EverRespect Offline
Free Kaplony
*

Posts: 28,615
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 975
I Root For: ODU
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-15-2020 08:35 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  The hits keep coming:

Quote:Around July 1993 at the financial data company he founded, Bloomberg allegedly browbeat a saleswoman in front of other employees. He’d just heard that the woman was having trouble finding a nanny, according to the lawsuit.

“It’s a ******* baby! All it does is eat and ****! It doesn’t know the difference between you and anyone else! All you need is some Black, who doesn’t even have to speak English, to rescue it from a burning building!” Bloomberg allegedly shouted.

Michael Bloomberg Nanny Some Black

This must be accurate, it's from HuffPo.
Bwahahaha... Huffington got taken over by the Russians

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
02-16-2020 12:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
q5sys Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,117
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 323
I Root For: MIT & USAFA
Location: DC/Baltimore Metro
Post: #35
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.

Right... but that's not something the Political Left cares about.
02-16-2020 10:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JMUDunk Online
Rootin' fer Dukes, bud
*

Posts: 21,664
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 1046
I Root For: Freedom
Location: Shmocation
Post: #36
Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-14-2020 10:03 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:56 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.

Call me crazy here, but if those officers were just patroling those high crime neighborhoods and not frisking over 500k people a year with around 90% of those people having nothing on them just maybe this wouldn't be an issue.

Maybe..but..What about that 10% that did have weapons? Those are the criminals that are causing the issues in the communities. I fully understand that what Bloomberg did goes against search and seizure laws..but..Where communities are suffering from these thugs..Is it a valid response? I'm not sure I disagree with what he did. Id be fine with being frisked if my street became safe again from these criminals.


This.

It’s also been shown that the vast majority of the crimes, something like 85% are committed by the same 10% or so. ( Someone’s welcome to look that up, been a while since I did anything with these numbers)

Guess who they’re looking for in these stops? Yes, that 10%.

AND it sends a strong and clear message to the next potential generation of criminals that it’s not as easy as it looks. The money, cars, women etc. Can all be gone, and likely will be, in a flash. One way or another.

Ami a fan or supporter of simply randomly throwing black kids against the wall and basically harassing them? No. That borders on a police state.

Do I think there needs to be proactive rather aggressive action taken to stop schit like the culture of the late 80’s-early 90’s and the killing fields in our inner cities like Richmond was?

Yes.

There is a balance there, it’s up to sensible people to find that balance. Seems like MM may taken it too far, but the counter response, from the idiot mayor now, looks to be returning parts of NYC to David Dinkins level stupid.

Guess Rudy had it about right all along. Who knew?!?
02-16-2020 12:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,665
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 495
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Bloomberg nearly wets himself when asked about his 2015 comments
(02-16-2020 12:54 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 10:03 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:56 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:45 PM)450bench Wrote:  They put officers in high crime areas to help reduce crime in those areas. He was right about that, which is a solid strategy.

Call me crazy here, but if those officers were just patroling those high crime neighborhoods and not frisking over 500k people a year with around 90% of those people having nothing on them just maybe this wouldn't be an issue.

Maybe..but..What about that 10% that did have weapons? Those are the criminals that are causing the issues in the communities. I fully understand that what Bloomberg did goes against search and seizure laws..but..Where communities are suffering from these thugs..Is it a valid response? I'm not sure I disagree with what he did. Id be fine with being frisked if my street became safe again from these criminals.


This.

It’s also been shown that the vast majority of the crimes, something like 85% are committed by the same 10% or so. ( Someone’s welcome to look that up, been a while since I did anything with these numbers)

Guess who they’re looking for in these stops? Yes, that 10%.

AND it sends a strong and clear message to the next potential generation of criminals that it’s not as easy as it looks. The money, cars, women etc. Can all be gone, and likely will be, in a flash. One way or another.

Ami a fan or supporter of simply randomly throwing black kids against the wall and basically harassing them? No. That borders on a police state.

Do I think there needs to be proactive rather aggressive action taken to stop schit like the culture of the late 80’s-early 90’s and the killing fields in our inner cities like Richmond was?

Yes.

There is a balance there, it’s up to sensible people to find that balance. Seems like MM may taken it too far, but the counter response, from the idiot mayor now, looks to be returning parts of NYC to David Dinkins level stupid.

Guess Rudy had it about right all along. Who knew?!?

Except for the fact that crime has decreased since stop and frisk decreased and continued to decrease every year, and they weren't finding guns 10% of the time. They were finding guns 0.1% of the time.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/it-...d-one-gun/

That doesn't border on a police state, that is a police state. That is pissing on people's rights, and you would rightfully lose your damn mind if a police officer wanted to stop and frisk you for no probably cause. Again they have a legal means to do stop and frisk, but it's called a Terry Stop and you have to have reasonable suspicion a crime is or is about to be committed.
(This post was last modified: 02-16-2020 01:06 PM by b0ndsj0ns.)
02-16-2020 01:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.