Opinion of Ray Kelly

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Based on today's ruling on stop-and-frisk.

HP, of course. (that was too tempting to not post, sorry)

[Peter the Lefty]

HP who got the smackdown that he deserved today.

[© tweed]

real-life fascist.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Probably your next Fatherland Security Secretary.

[TNF]

real-life fascist.

[TDAS04]

HP.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Probably your next Fatherland Security Secretary.

[Old Man Svensson]

I may legitimately bugger off out of the country if he becomes SHS.

[WalterMitty]

seems like a good guy. 

[bedstuy]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.  They would be fine going back to the days when the NYPD didn't event try to police large parts of NYC.  But, believe me, it's certainly better to have overzealous cops than gangs killing kids left and right.

While I would have liked more community policing and a less stop-and-frisk tactics and slavish devotion to crime stats, he's done a good job overall.

[H. Ross Peron]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.  They would be fine going back to the days when the NYPD didn't event try to police large parts of NYC.  But, believe me, it's certainly better to have overzealous cops than gangs killing kids left and right.

While I would have liked more community policing and a less stop-and-frisk tactics and slavish devotion to crime states, he's done a good job overall.

[traininthedistance]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.  They would be fine going back to the days when the NYPD didn't event try to police large parts of NYC.  But, believe me, it's certainly better to have overzealous cops than gangs killing kids left and right.

While I would have liked more community policing and a less stop-and-frisk tactics and slavish devotion to crime states, he's done a good job overall.

Except that stop and frisk has just about nothing to do with the drop in crime in NYC.

[bedstuy]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.  They would be fine going back to the days when the NYPD didn't event try to police large parts of NYC.  But, believe me, it's certainly better to have overzealous cops than gangs killing kids left and right.

While I would have liked more community policing and a less stop-and-frisk tactics and slavish devotion to crime states, he's done a good job overall.

Except that stop and frisk has just about nothing to do with the drop in crime in NYC.

Did I say that Stop-and-Frisk was the key policy in reducing crime?  Even so, how do you know that it has done nothing to reduce crime?   

And, it's not like the range of policing strategies is either: stop-and-frisk, or not.  I'm not an expert on this stuff, but I do see NYPD policing first-hand.  The more active presence of cops under Kelly seems to have worked in my neighborhood.  I don't see cops harassing people at random, but I do see a more active, responsive NYPD.  Certainly, NYC is safer than comparable American cities. 

[nolesfan2011]

real-life fascist.

[Kitteh]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.

Yes, because I'm sure that people in the South Bronx strongly support stop and frisk

[bedstuy]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.

Yes, because I'm sure that people in the South Bronx strongly support stop and frisk

You'd be surprised.  When crime is out of control in your neighborhood, you tend to value public safety over legal technicalities.  There is not a great relationship between cops and the residents of these neighborhoods, sure.  But, most of them have not been stopped by police, yet they have seen the murder rate down 80-90% under Ray Kelly. 

[Lief 🗽]

legal technicalities

aka constitutional rights.

[Kitteh]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.

Yes, because I'm sure that people in the South Bronx strongly support stop and frisk

You'd be surprised.  When crime is out of control in your neighborhood, you tend to value public safety over legal technicalities.  There is not a great relationship between cops and the residents of these neighborhoods, sure.  But, most of them have not been stopped by police, yet they have seen the murder rate down 80-90% under Ray Kelly.  

First of all, the idea that this is a "legal technicality" is ridiculously removed from people's actual experiences. This is about being able to trust the people who are supposed to be protecting you and being able to live without automatically being labeled a suspect because of the color of your skin. That's not a "technicality".

Secondly:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/16/stop-and-frisk-poll-shows-nypd-racially-divided_n_1788576.html

The idea that "upper-middle class white liberals" are the main opponents of stop and frisk is idiotic and the exact opposite of reality. The wealthy white liberals who support[ed] Bloomberg are very much in favor of this practice, which is exactly why it has support in as liberal a city as NYC.

[traininthedistance]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.

Yes, because I'm sure that people in the South Bronx strongly support stop and frisk

You'd be surprised.  When crime is out of control in your neighborhood, you tend to value public safety over legal technicalities.  There is not a great relationship between cops and the residents of these neighborhoods, sure.  But, most of them have not been stopped by police, yet they have seen the murder rate down 80-90% under Ray Kelly.  

First of all, the idea that this is a "legal technicality" is ridiculously removed from people's actual experiences. This is about being able to trust the people who are supposed to be protecting you and being able to live without automatically being labeled a suspect because of the color of your skin. That's not a "technicality".

Secondly:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/16/stop-and-frisk-poll-shows-nypd-racially-divided_n_1788576.html

The idea that "upper-middle class white liberals" are the main opponents of stop and frisk is idiotic and the exact opposite of reality. The wealthy white liberals who support[ed] Bloomberg are very much in favor of this practice, which is exactly why it has support in as liberal a city as NYC.

It's worth noting that support for stop-and-frisk is almost as high among Hispanics (53 percent) than it is among whites (57 percent).

And I would be willing to bet, actually, that "wealthy white liberals" actually support it at much, much lower clips than whites in the city at large, ergo apparently at lower clips than Hispanics. The white population of NYC includes more conservative and moderate areas than you would expect at first blush: add up Staten Island, southern Brooklyn, northeastern Queens, and together you have more people than Manhattan, most of whom are white non-liberals who probably support stop-and-frisk at rather gaudy rates.

The real base of support for these policies isn't to be found on the Upper East Side, but neither is it to be found in Brownsville.  It's to be found in Bensonhurst.

[bedstuy]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.

Yes, because I'm sure that people in the South Bronx strongly support stop and frisk

You'd be surprised.  When crime is out of control in your neighborhood, you tend to value public safety over legal technicalities.  There is not a great relationship between cops and the residents of these neighborhoods, sure.  But, most of them have not been stopped by police, yet they have seen the murder rate down 80-90% under Ray Kelly.  

First of all, the idea that this is a "legal technicality" is ridiculously removed from people's actual experiences. This is about being able to trust the people who are supposed to be protecting you and being able to live without automatically being labeled a suspect because of the color of your skin. That's not a "technicality".

Secondly:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/16/stop-and-frisk-poll-shows-nypd-racially-divided_n_1788576.html

The idea that "upper-middle class white liberals" are the main opponents of stop and frisk is idiotic and the exact opposite of reality. The wealthy white liberals who support[ed] Bloomberg are very much in favor of this practice, which is exactly why it has support in as liberal a city as NYC.

That whole racial angle is overblown.

There are neighborhoods where a lot of stop and frisk takes place.  There aren't any white people in those neighborhoods.  Do you think cops are just stopping random people?  

[traininthedistance]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.  They would be fine going back to the days when the NYPD didn't event try to police large parts of NYC.  But, believe me, it's certainly better to have overzealous cops than gangs killing kids left and right.

While I would have liked more community policing and a less stop-and-frisk tactics and slavish devotion to crime states, he's done a good job overall.

Except that stop and frisk has just about nothing to do with the drop in crime in NYC.

Did I say that Stop-and-Frisk was the key policy in reducing crime?  Even so, how do you know that it has done nothing to reduce crime?   

And, it's not like the range of policing strategies is either: stop-and-frisk, or not.  I'm not an expert on this stuff, but I do see NYPD policing first-hand.  The more active presence of cops under Kelly seems to have worked in my neighborhood.  I don't see cops harassing people at random, but I do see a more active, responsive NYPD.  Certainly, NYC is safer than comparable American cities. 

Sure, there are other policing strategies, I know that.  They're not getting the heat that stop-and-frisk does, because they are not prima facie racist and horrible (and, yes, the stats are quite clear that stop-and-frisk is racist).  I'm sure many of those other policing strategies are better, which is why I'm not talking about them.

But, of course, I'm pretty deeply skeptical that policing strategies can make much of a difference besides tinkering around the margins.  The drop in crime- which has been nationwide, not just in NYC- really owes more than anything else to getting rid of leaded gasoline.  It's not the only factor, okay, but it's really the major one.  But of course everyone focuses on policing methods because people who work in law enforcement have an (entirely understandable) bias towards explanations that make them the hero.

[bedstuy]

It's easy for upper middle class white liberals to criticize some of these policing strategies, because they never had to live in the South Bronx or East Flatbush.  They would be fine going back to the days when the NYPD didn't event try to police large parts of NYC.  But, believe me, it's certainly better to have overzealous cops than gangs killing kids left and right.

While I would have liked more community policing and a less stop-and-frisk tactics and slavish devotion to crime states, he's done a good job overall.

Except that stop and frisk has just about nothing to do with the drop in crime in NYC.

Did I say that Stop-and-Frisk was the key policy in reducing crime?  Even so, how do you know that it has done nothing to reduce crime?   

And, it's not like the range of policing strategies is either: stop-and-frisk, or not.  I'm not an expert on this stuff, but I do see NYPD policing first-hand.  The more active presence of cops under Kelly seems to have worked in my neighborhood.  I don't see cops harassing people at random, but I do see a more active, responsive NYPD.  Certainly, NYC is safer than comparable American cities. 

Sure, there are other policing strategies, I know that.  They're not getting the heat that stop-and-frisk does, because they are not prima facie racist and horrible (and, yes, the stats are quite clear that stop-and-frisk is racist).  I'm sure many of those other policing strategies are better, which is why I'm not talking about them.

But, of course, I'm pretty deeply skeptical that policing strategies can make much of a difference besides tinkering around the margins.  The drop in crime- which has been nationwide, not just in NYC- really owes more than anything else to getting rid of leaded gasoline.  It's not the only factor, okay, but it's really the major one.  But of course everyone focuses on policing methods because people who work in law enforcement have an (entirely understandable) bias towards explanations that make them the hero.

How is stop-and-frisk clearly racist?  Policing happens where the crime is.  The high crime areas are the black and Hispanic neighborhoods.  Should we take cops off Alabama Avenue to put them on Park Avenue to not be racist?  And, the fact is that most of the crime committed in NYC is committed by blacks and Hispanics.  So, just looking at the stop and frisk stats is not clear evidence in my book. 

[traininthedistance]

How is stop-and-frisk clearly racist?  Policing happens where the crime is.  The high crime areas are the black and Hispanic neighborhoods.  Should we take cops off Alabama Avenue to put them on Park Avenue to not be racist?  And, the fact is that most of the crime committed in NYC is committed by blacks and Hispanics.  So, just looking at the stop and frisk stats is not clear evidence in my book. 

No, it's racist using statistics that control for just that very fact, as it so turns out:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2013/08/scheindlin-stop-and-frisk-verdict-new-york-statistical-debate.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The bolded part is really key here.  The fact that minorities are being roughed up more, and let go more because they didn't actually do anything wrong, is entirely consistent with and the obvious consequence of a policy that is engaging in racial profiling: stop lots of browns no matter what, only stop whites when you have a good reason.

[bedstuy]

Some of those geographic statistical points are a little bit misleading.  White people who live in black neighborhoods aren't living in NYCHA housing projects or running with gangs.  So, it's less often that cops have reason to stop white people in black neighborhoods.

On the larger point, NYPD cops are racist!  Of course!  They're dumb rednecks and meatheads who treat everyone like crap.  That's not attributable to stop and frisk.