Ever since the judge told New York City that the way they were doing stop and frisk was illegal, Michael Bloomberg has railed against the judge non-stop. Well Mayor, it's time to stop.
I don't live in New York, but I do have a brother who lives there, so I do have a small stake in this. I don't want to see him injured or hurt. But the judge, contrary to what the Mayor has said, didn't say that stop and frisk is illegal, but how New York is doing it violates people's 4th Amendment rights. So why didn't Bloomberg say that, while the city doesn't agree with the judge and will appeal, it will try to see how it can continue the policy without violating anyone's rights. Wouldn't that be a legal and prudent way to go? Tell me Mayor, is 85% of your city's crime in Black and Hispanic neighborhoods? That's the percentage of minorities that were stopped. You think that it break no person's rights when almost 90% of those stopped had no guns, and 87% were breaking no laws and had no warrants for them? So, how did these people or actually, why did you stop and frisk these people? You don't think there may be a problem there? At least one person, and it was a judge, did. And I'm sure many others do, too.
Ever since the judge ruled against stop and frisk in New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has railed against the judge and trying to explain why the city did it. Take a chill pill, Mayor. Observe the judge's ruling, and appeal it in court. It's called the rule of law, and you have no more right to go against it than right-wing legislatures who want to do away with gun control laws. And I'l speak out against both sides, and so should others.
No comments:
Post a Comment