Ponzholio: Ennuipoet: If you're one of the 2.5 million ethnic minorities NYPD stopped and frisked over the last 5 years, don't worry, you're still in their computer system.

/Altered to more accurately reflect the reality of the program.^

Well, I'm sure they were guilty of something... maybe not for what they were stopped for, but something.

/mostly this
http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/analysis-new-nypd-stop-and-frisk-data-reveals -dramatic-impact-black-new-yorkers

If you were so innocent, why'd they frisk you? Answer me that one.

"A vast majority of the people targeted - close to 90 percent - are completely innocent."

Reasonable percentage.

Isn't it good that this database exists so conduct like this can be tracked?

The oss around Long Island are overpaid and underworked. Ten of them show up for a car accident.

Well how else are they supposed to do all the awesome shiat like on CSI if they didn't have a DNA database of every citizen they could get their mitts on?

cp87: Isn't it good that this database exists so conduct like this can be tracked?

I didn't realize they had a database for DWB

The overwhelming majority of the stops yield no law-enforcement benefit whatsoever. An analysis of the stops in the first three quarters of 2009 showed that contraband, which usually means drugs, was found on just 1.6 percent of the blacks who were stopped, 1.5 percent of the Hispanics, and 2.2 percent of the whites (who are stopped far less often than the other groups).

Not surprised but these are the reasons why Blacks and Latinos have such a high incarceration rate. The wealthy white people do just as many drugs as the rest of us but cops would never dare search them for no reason.

Soon they might start taking DNA samples as well. Don't look for this to get any better, its not the nature of the establishment to think this is a problem.

It was actually the analysis of this database that showed that the searches affected ethnic minorities more, according the NYCLU. It would seem to be in the best interest of the public for the database to exist.

If you're one of the 99% of Americans over the age of 18 who have a drivers' license, don't worry, you're still in a government computer system.

If you've got a credit card, don't worry, you're still in shiatloads of corporate computer systems.

If you have a telephone...

If you've ever gotten a speeding ticket...

If you post on the internet...

If you've ever been in the newspaper...

If you've ever been to the hospital...

If you've ever served in the military...


Personal information paranoia of this type is silly. You exist, just like 7 billion others just like you. You're in a lot of computer systems. Stop letting conspiracy movies influence your views on what privacy means.

If there is a database of innocent people, Skynet won't have to kill off everyone.

Protect and serve.

ZipSplat: If you're one of the 99% of Americans over the age of 18 who have a drivers' license, don't worry, you're still in a government computer system.

If you've got a credit card, don't worry, you're still in shiatloads of corporate computer systems.

If you have a telephone...

If you've ever gotten a speeding ticket...

If you post on the internet...

If you've ever been in the newspaper...

If you've ever been to the hospital...

If you've ever served in the military...


Personal information paranoia of this type is silly. You exist, just like 7 billion others just like you. You're in a lot of computer systems. Stop letting conspiracy movies influence your views on what privacy means.

But of course none of those lists are titled "Potential/Suspected Criminals" either. Well, other than the speeding ticket one.

If all the three-letter Government acronyms can have Megabytes of data on "exploding underpants man", and yet he still gets on the plane for his party piece, I wouldn't be too upset by New York's finest creating yet another database monster that is largely unaccessable or useful in any way. Credit where it's due, they are all morons after all...

Ja, I do not see what be ze problem with such a list. Perhaps we should ask the Ordinary Men at IBM if they have anything to say

/godwinite bomb armed,failsafe removed

jjorsett: If you were so innocent, why'd they frisk you? Answer me that one.

The scary thing is, there are TONS of people who are honestly stupid enough to believe this, and they vote!

ZipSplat: If you're one of the 99% of Americans over the age of 18 who have a drivers' license, don't worry, you're still in a government computer system.

If you've got a credit card, don't worry, you're still in shiatloads of corporate computer systems.

If you have a telephone...

If you've ever gotten a speeding ticket...

If you post on the internet...

If you've ever been in the newspaper...

If you've ever been to the hospital...

If you've ever served in the military...


Personal information paranoia of this type is silly. You exist, just like 7 billion others just like you. You're in a lot of computer systems. Stop letting conspiracy movies influence your views on what privacy means.

drivers' license - voluntary
credit card - voluntary
telephone - voluntary
speeding ticket - voluntary
internet - voluntary
newspaper - voluntary
hospital - often voluntary, acceptable in exchange for service
military - voluntary

Minding your own business walking down the street and being stopped and groped by the cops because they're bored? That's not voluntary. I'm actually surprised the cops would spend the time and effort to fill out the paperwork on the innocent people anyway unless they have a quota to fill.

What if you're one of the people the NYPD ran over at a cross-walk in Harlem and the NYPD are still refusing to accept responsibility?

i was pissed off at the cops, than i googled...i see no crime here, lock them all up!

http://tinyurl.com/yl9mvr4 NSFW

/hurry!

jjorsett: If you were so innocent, why'd they frisk you? Answer me that one.

stiletto_the_wise: The scary thing is, there are TONS of people who are honestly stupid enough to believe this, and they are allowed to vote!

/ftfy

Oh you black people. Everything is always an affront to you, isn't it?

/get a job.

So? this is how you catch people with warrants.

ZAZ: Ponzholio: Well, I'm sure they were guilty of something... maybe not for what they were stopped for, but something.

That's what the cops think. "A spokesman for Commissioner Kelly told me that information collected when the police stop an innocent individual "may be useful" in future investigations." (NYT March 1, 2010)

Sure, they're innocent NOW, but sooner or later they'll rob or murder someone.

/sarcasm

TheSwizz: Oh you black people. Everything is always an affront to you, isn't it?

/get a job.

Obvious but still inflammatory. B-

WoahThereFatty: So? this is how you catch people with warrants.

They could also do some work and figure out where the person lives and serve it there. Why pester those that have done nothing wrong?

and of course whites are stopped less often, they are less than a third of the population, and are probably around 5% in high crime areas.

StoPPeRmobile: WoahThereFatty: So? this is how you catch people with warrants.

They could also do some work and figure out where the person lives and serve it there. Why pester those that have done nothing wrong?

People with felony warrants often live with friends. so they would have a registed address

wouldnt*

Ennuipoet: If you're one of the 2.5 million ethnic minorities NYPD stopped and frisked over the last 5 years, don't worry, you're still in their computer system.

/Altered to more accurately reflect the reality of the program.^

What percentage of violent street crime is committed by blacks and hispanics anyways?

ZipSplat: Personal information paranoia of this type is silly. You exist, just like 7 billion others just like you. You're in a lot of computer systems. Stop letting conspiracy movies influence your views on what privacy means.

Not quite.

1. Police databases can contain lots of info. And yes, they do get compromised. Think they get a budget for software updates every year? Yea right. We've learned via previous fark articles that typewriters and a shared Windows ME workstation aren't uncommon. You bet people are taking advantage of that.

2. Certain people have a responsibility to keep info private, for example your doctor regarding your medical history, your employer regarding your SSN etc. If you give your SSN to any job you apply for (you should never do this), don't be shocked if it's not protected. Privacy laws are unfortunately written for when data is collected correctly, not when it's given out randomly. If you give ME your medical info, I have no legal obligation to not blab it. If you give it to your doctor... he's required by law to keep shut.

People often don't realize how easy misuse of personal info is.

Last time I needed a new ATM card they just asked for my account # and address. I could have taken my neighbors last statement out of the mail, got a new card and just staked out their mailbox for the card. Then I'm free to draw from their account.

Lots of companies still use partial social security numbers in customer #'s. There's no standard regarding which numbers to use (though last 4 is more likely unique within a locale). Examine enough junk mail, and you can piece it together. It's getting harder now that companies are changing this practice, but you likely still can do it. Partials when combined with other numbers aren't illegal yet AFAIK.


The biggest risk is third parties with access to the data. It's easy to ruin someones life by opening some accounts. It's impossible in todays financial system to correct. Your effectively "tagged". People with these problems have trouble buying homes, getting loans, starting businesses for the rest of their life. It sucks if you get in this position. "liability" is just a tiny part of the problem and easily fixed. It's rebuilding your name after. Even when you get it cleared up, your still flagged as a high risk because your info has been used inappropriately before.

I'm an excellent driver: If all the three-letter Government acronyms can have Megabytes of data on "exploding underpants man", and yet he still gets on the plane for his party piece, I wouldn't be too upset by New York's finest creating yet another database monster that is largely unaccessable or useful in any way. Credit where it's due, they are all morons after all...

Underpants man is just for higher level propaganda. Every instance of an underpants man-like situation brings in millions or billions for certain groups. The databases in question in this story are more for trapping large numbers of people that have to pay some kind of smaller fine or fee that adds up to millions paid to lower-tiered groups that don't have the imagination to cook up the schemes that would net millions per incident. I'm just saying that probably the three-letter agencies have their eyes on a larger prize.

WoahThereFatty: and of course whites are stopped less often, they are less than a third of the population, and are probably around 5% in high crime areas.

suck it, troll.

/or at least i hope you are.
//for your sake

WoahThereFatty: So? this is how you catch people with warrants.

No, this is how you catch people with warrants: (new window)

WoahThereFatty: People with felony warrants often live with friends. so they would have a registed address

How is that my responsibility? Id it my fault that they found a way to use the system? Like I said earlier, do some work and find them. If collections goons can do it so can they.

This just in: people with power tend to abuse it.

But the cops had to do it to fill their quotas... You know, instead of wasting their time preventing/stopping crimes.

I dunno, it think it's a good idea to have them keep keeping records. Otherwise, you wouldn't have any proof on how much they're abusing this and how ineffective it is.

Ok, so here's the thing: I'm not defending any kind of racial profiling policies that may have led to this, but there are a few things you have to remember. And this is coming from a former officer.

1) Technically, anyone they talk to can be subject to a pat down, so long as the officer suspects them of having committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. This is the one search that can be done without "probable cause," which is what all police work hinges on. This is pretty much applied to anyone that is suspicious in nature, which is of course objective to the officer, so realistically anyone the officer talks to can be subject to a "Terry" pat down.

There are some restrictions, of course. Most departments put restrictions that whenever possible, all pat downs on a person of the opposite sex should be done by a third party officer of the same sex. If that's not possible, having a witness on hand or preferably a video tape, to satisfy your basic CYA.

This search is done for the protection of the officer and the public. "Terry v. Ohio" decided that a pat down of the outer clothing for weapons was in the best interest of both parties. Obviously, it protects the officer in that he or she knows if the person is armed or not. But it's also to the benefit of the public, the officer can ease back their unease and defenses, secure in the knowledge that the person reaching into their pants pocket isn't likely to draw a knife.

The restriction with this search is that it's ONLY to find weapons. The officer is not allowed to go into the pockets of any article of clothing unless they suspect a weapon, so they can't just turn out your pockets all willy-nilly. There were many times after I gave someone a frisk that I felt something that was beyond a reasonable doubt a couple of small, irregular shaped rocks with the distinct crinkle of a plastic baggy when I felt there. But I didn't, and couldn't, go into the pockets and arrest them for drug possession.

Remember, this search is purely for weapons. If I were to have gone into the pockets, arrested them for the baggy of crack, and tried to explain to the judge why I went into their pockets, I would have had the case tossed out (the evidence would have been considered fruit of the proverbial "poisonous tree") and I would have been sent to remedial instruction on Probable Cause. If the officer suspects a weapon, and can prove in court that it was the shape of something resembling a weapon, and HAPPEN to find said drugs, then an arrest can be made.

Now, back to the original point: A Terry Pat Down is a standard thing. An officer can, theoretically, frisk everyone they talk to to be safe. They won't, because that's paranoid and a lot of paperwork.

2) And now, for the paperwork. At least 80% of my time in the PD was spent doing paperwork. Every time you talk to someone, you had to fill out an Incident Based Report, or an "IBR." These things were six pages, front and back. Someone calls us because they got mugged, we fill out an IBR on them and their description of the suspect. We get called for a domestic, we fill out one for the woman and one for the husband.

Now, obviously, we didn't fill out the entire things. There were sections to fill out about how we found a body, which was non applicable if we dealt with a live person. There were lines to fill out for assault suspects description, which didn't apply if it was a traffic stop. Everyone we talked to in an official capacity got an IBR filled out. We were supposed to get an ID number, if possible, but most times we were lazy and fudged over that in the non-important cases.

My point is, there were records of everyone we talked to and everything we did, the idea being of building up a database of knowledge for certain areas. If we were down by Oceanview and someone got beat down, we may be able to match their description to a description of another person we previously dealt with, or maybe a description that someone else gave of a similar case in that area. It did come in handy sometimes, especially when you were the new guy in that area like I was, so that you can get an idea of what and who you're dealing with before you even get there.

Now, I'm sure armed with this knowledge, it's still not going to change anyone's mind when it comes to police or the job that they do. People will still view them as authoritarian monsters. Maybe this information will make you think that even more. But I just wanted to pass it along that the pat down and paperwork records, in and of itself, is not wrong or even illegal.

Who they are deciding to do it to based on race or poverty level is a whole other, and very valid, argument. But let it be known that the activity itself is not illegal.

/didn't read the article yet

MaritimeGirl: drivers' license - voluntary
credit card - voluntary
telephone - voluntary
speeding ticket - voluntary
internet - voluntary
newspaper - voluntary
hospital - often voluntary, acceptable in exchange for service
military - voluntary

Minding your own business walking down the street and being stopped and groped by the cops because they're bored?

you need a drivers' license to drive on public roads. so, walking down a public road is also - VOLUNTARY

ZipSplat: If you're one of the 99% of Americans over the age of 18 who have a drivers' license, don't worry, you're still in a government computer system.

If you've got a credit card, don't worry, you're still in shiatloads of corporate computer systems.

If you have a telephone...

If you've ever gotten a speeding ticket...

If you post on the internet...

If you've ever been in the newspaper...

If you've ever been to the hospital...

If you've ever served in the military...


Personal information paranoia of this type is silly. You exist, just like 7 billion others just like you. You're in a lot of computer systems. Stop letting conspiracy movies influence your views on what privacy means.

Did you forget the 4th amendment, to be free from unreasonable search and seizure by the government. or is the constitution not important to you either?

If they were getting rid of these tapes and records, they'd be accused of "whitwashing," "hiding evidence of abuse," "destroying papers," etc.. I'd rather, if something happened, records of these incidents were available to show patterns of misconduct.