stop and frisk policy

Planned Parenthood has been here for 100 years and one thing is clear — we will never back down, and we will never stop providing the care our patients need.

Together, we are immigrants, Muslims, Black, Latinx, white, people with disabilities, LGBTQ people, and everyone else who needs access to health care in a safe and welcoming place. Much of the rhetoric used in the last several months has created a frighteningly more dangerous America for people of color—one where unlawful stop-and-frisk policies, that have been found unconstitutional, are enforced, where immigrants are at risk of facing immediate deportation, where Muslims may be banned from entering the country, and where discrimination against LGBT communities and disabled people is deemed acceptable. This cannot be what it means to live in America in 2016.

So when I say I’m frustrated with a lot of Democrats and liberals its mainly because they haven’t been overtly opposed to things that will actually affect marginalized people.  They’re angry about abortion laws because that infringes on the freedoms that white women also have access to.  But they haven’t truly stood up and actively opposed a Nationwide Stop and Frisk policy, or a Muslim registry, and some even say that they’ll work with Trump’s administration as long as he prioritizes “economic disparities”.   I don’t even think they’ll fight for Native sovereignty  or support protestors in any marginalized group if we “rock the boat” too much for them to stay comfortable. 

It seems like they’re saying that there are minorities that they’re willing to serve up to white supremacists in the hopes of appeasing the new administration, and they’ll give Democrats some kind of concession in return.  During the election, people said that no one would be expendable, but its seems like people are already prepared to go back on that promise the moment things get a little challenging for them.  I don’t think its a good idea to sit and wait and “give Trump a chance” when lives are at stake…I think that the more we let them get away with, the more they’ll do. 

They already gave us that obedience test to see if we would let them get away with their fascism, because they’ve been stoking white anxiety and dehumanizing minorities for years. 

Our findings suggest that racism literally makes people old,” Chae said, citing the “social toxins” African American men experience as a result of stereotyping, police harassment, and disrespect in the workplace and society. ”Stop-and-frisk policies and other forms of criminal profiling such as ‘driving or shopping while Black’ are inherently stressful and have a real impact on the health of African Americans.

Don Lemon asks whether stop and frisk should be reinstated.

Let me get this straight Don, you’re asking if an anti-Black racist policy should be reinstated? Should a policy that violates the rights of Black people be reinstated? Should harassment by the police be reinstated? Should an unconstitutional policy be reinstated? All of that is stop and frisk.

If you’ve ever been stopped and frisked on multiple occasions, there is no way you’d ever support such a measure.

Don Lemon is the worst. The absolute worst. He has no self-respect or dignity.

In his speech “Terrorism: Theirs and Ours,” now deceased professor Eqbal Ahmad elucidated five types of terrorism: state, religious, mafia, pathological, and political terror of the private group, or “oppositional terror.” Of these types, the focus in mainstream political discourse and the media has almost always centered itself on discussion of just one: “political terror of the private group.” As Ahmad pointed out, this is “the least important in terms of cost to human lives and human property.” Rarely discussed is state terror, which, unsurprisingly, has the highest cost in terms of humans lives and property. Ahmad estimated that the disparity of people killed by state terror compared to those killed by individual acts of terror was, roughly, 100,000 to one. Of course, there are subsets Ahmad did not mention that splice state terror apart, one being the state’s enforcer class — the police.

We do not often talk about policing in the terms of terrorism because it is counter to everything we are taught, but a brief look into history can help us understand it as a function of the state. As David Whitehouse notes, the creation of modern police served two primary functions: To control the political and economic potential of the labor class in the North and slaves in the South. In the Carolinas in particular, slave patrols modeled the evolution of its police force by providing a form of organized terror to deter potential runaways and slave revolts. Whitehouse quotes one historian as saying “throughout all of the [Southern] states [before the Civil War], roving armed police patrols scoured the countryside day and night, intimidating, terrorizing, and brutalizing slaves into submission and meekness.” The methods employed were certainly chilling: lynching, lashing, rape, and feeding slaves to hungry dogs, to name a few.

So why all the need for control? In 1984, George Shultz, the United States Secretary of State under President Reagan, described terrorism as “a form of political violence.” Prior to the Civil War slavery was indispensable to the Southern economy in much the same fashion as low-wage labor was to Northern factories. In short, white supremacy was essential to America’s economic and political power structure. Deploying an institution to forcibly maintain such a power structure can only be defined as an obvious expression of political violence. Today, from profiling policies like Stop and Frisk, to the War-on-Drugs which dis-proportionally incarcerates black (and brown) people, to its sentencing-laws that increase in severity if you are black, to the fact that a black person is killed by cops or vigilantes every 28 hours, policing remains a form of political violence precisely tailored to maintain America’s classist and racist hierarchy.

NYC mayor drops city’s appeal of stop-and-frisk ruling

NBC New York: New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s administration has filed court papers seeking to drop an appeal of a judge’s decision ordering major reforms to the police department’s stop-and-frisk policy.

Follow updates on the stop-and-frisk controversy on

Photo: A woman marches against police stop-and-frisk tactics on February 23, 2013 in New York City. (Andrew Burton/Getty Images via

I suspect liberals imagine, at some level, that a Prohibition-style campaign against guns would mostly involve busting up gun shows and disarming Robert Dear-like trailer-park loners. But in practice it would probably look more like Michael Bloomberg’s controversial stop-and-frisk policy, with a counterterrorism component that ended up heavily targeting Muslim Americans. In areas where gun ownership is high but crime rates low, like Bernie Sanders’ Vermont, authorities would mostly turn a blind eye to illegal guns, while poor and minority communities bore the brunt of raids and fines and jail terms.

Liberalism’s Gun Problem

Every time you advocate for a new law, or a new item or activity to be made illegal, you’re advocating for the brute force of government coercion to enforce that new law. History has shown us that minorities, be they racial or political, bear the brunt of these new laws. If you thought the War on Drugs was bad with all of its inherent racism and the way it led to the militarization of the police and the creation of an “Us vs. Them” mentality in policing, just wait for the War on Guns. Millions of black and brown people will end up in prison while supply and access to guns will become ubiquitous.

When states pass “Stand Your Ground” laws, they aren’t passing them so that black men can defend themselves against white men who threaten their lives. When the NRA talks about families needing to defend themselves against gang violence, they aren’t talking to the people of color most likely to be impacted by gang violence. When cities develop “stop and frisk” policies, they aren’t developing them in hopes of reducing violent crime in white men. These are all built on the same violent narrative used to lynch black people in the past.

Only now, instead of saying “brute” or “savage” they say thug.

By design, this narrative not only justifies violence against black people, it also denies black people the access to protection and government services that would help end cycles of violence in the black community. Black people do not have access to police protection for fear of police brutality. Black people do not have access to jobs when fear of blackness has made them unhireable. Black people do not have access to quality education when the narrative of black violence leads teachers to view young black kids at play as violent. It is not in the best interest of white supremacy for violence in the black community to end. How else would they be able to justify oppression and exploitation?
We will not break the law to enforce the law. That’s my solemn promise to every New Yorker, regardless of where they were born, where they live, or what they look like. Those values aren’t at odds with keeping New Yorkers safe — they are essential to long-term public safety.
—  NYC Police Commissioner William J. Bratton • Promising to abandon the New York Police Department’s unconstitutional stop-and-frisk policies during a press conference at Brownsville Recreation Center. The conference also doubled as a platform for New York Mayor Bill de Blasio to announce an out-of-court settlement with civil rights lawyers that had sued the city as a result of the controversial NYPD policy. source

anonymous asked:

You're just mad your candidate can barely move after her stroke

Nope, actually I’m mad that your candidate, Donald Trump, bragged about sexually assaulting women, saying that as a celebrity you can do whatever you want to women. I’m mad that he embarrassed women, called them fat or ugly, slut shaming them and body shaming them. I’m mad that he’s setting a terrible example for our kids. I’m mad that his platform includes conversion therapy for queer kids. I’m mad that he’s racist, not only against black people but any POC, including and especially Muslim people and Hispanic/Lantinx people. I’m mad that he’s trying to call Hillary out for doing her job as a public defender, which required her to defend anyone, regardless of their crimes, to the best of her ability, including rapists, because they are entitled to a fair trial. Im mad that your candidate is accused of molesting a child. I’m mad that his running mate has voted for bills that allow discrimination. I’m mad that your candidate is in favor of Stop and Frisk, a policy which is proven to incite violence between police and unarmed black people. I’m mad that both he and his running mate have said they believe people who get abortions should be punished. I’m mad that your candidate used funds from his charitable foundation to not only buy portraits of himself, but to defend himself and his company in court. I’m mad that your candidate probably hasn’t paid income tax since the 90s. I’m mad that your candidate avoids answering any questions thrown at him. I’m mad that your candidate is a lying, misogynist, homophobe, racist piece of ignorant, childish trash.

And you should be mad too. You should expect better from your party than this. Donald Trump is disgusting. He was disgusting in the 90s, he was disgusting in 2005, and he’s disgusting now. Yet, you come onto MY blog and try to act like Hillary is somehow unqualified to be president? When your voting for the human embodiment of old chicken left in a hot dumpster? Now get the FUCK off my blog and out of my ask box.

the stop and frisk policy shows how our very authority has normalized the idea that black and brown people are inherently threatening, deserving of proper inspection and detention while white people are supposedly the drug free do-gooders despite what the statistics actually say. which begs the question is this authority here for us? if not then why do we allow our taxes go into it? do we really need more racist police and prisons or do we need more intervention? more medical help/coverage, psychological aid, physical and economic assistance? are we really set to be on this downward spiral of repeating the same shit over and over allowing faux authority figures on a platform that was never meant to work for humans but for apathetic enterprises have a say on what is legal or not while operating under an even more sinister practice than petty thieves and drug offenders do? that doesn’t sound like a future I wanna be near but it’s the sad reality and I think about this a lot when people deny that such things as our racist policies are anything but a clear representation of all this fuckery..