Hochul plans renewed push against illegal guns
- Thread starter gunpoliticsny
- Start date
Bigfoot
.475 A&M Magnum
"The governor did not give specifics on her plan, but does plan on expanding resources for the State Police as well as leaning on an existing multi-state task force that started earlier in the year to tackle the issue of illegal firearms."
They spelled legal wrong.
It's all so tiring.
FUKH
They spelled legal wrong.
It's all so tiring.
FUKH
Last edited:
Cavalry
.338 Win Mag
Stop the flow of guns from neighboring states? I cant wait to hear this jackass plan, are we going to search every car crossing into NY?
Bigfoot
.475 A&M Magnum
"The governor did not give specifics on her plan,"
gunpoliticsny
6.5 Creedmoor
Jsmegs77
.308 Win
While this would perhaps be commendable if true, it in point of fact is patently false. They have absolutely no plan to deal with “illegal” guns or more importantly, the criminals who use them. Penalties for using a stolen weapon in a crime, or removing a serial number from such a gun, for example, will not be considered, or enforced if they’re already on the books (I didn’t look).
Every single crackpot scheme they propose directly targets legal firearms and their owners, without exception. The single MOST law abiding segment of the population, by a long shot… So, as @Bigfoot said, they spelled “legal” wrong.
Every single crackpot scheme they propose directly targets legal firearms and their owners, without exception. The single MOST law abiding segment of the population, by a long shot… So, as @Bigfoot said, they spelled “legal” wrong.
To stop this trade of guns and the killings/shootings/murders in the State, one only needs to go into the inner cities. Go into the poorer areas where the vermin are committing these crimes.
The vast majority of shootings and killings are found there. Not in the Suburbs, not in the Rural areas. Go into these nasty neighborhoods and end their will and want to commit these crimes.
If you are not willing to do this, shut the fuck up.
The vast majority of shootings and killings are found there. Not in the Suburbs, not in the Rural areas. Go into these nasty neighborhoods and end their will and want to commit these crimes.
If you are not willing to do this, shut the fuck up.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
fnfalguy
.308 Win
They don't have the courage to actually address the issue in a real and meaningful way. But you already knew that based upon life experience I'm guessing.
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
Fine do this with illegal guns but back off of us, yeah right.
I'm not a law enforcement officer or politician. But I understand geography and statistics. I would bet a paycheck that 95% of shootings in the state occur in less than 5% of the land area. I'll go a step further and say each county probably has about 5 square miles that 90% of that counties violent crimes and shootings occur within.
How about focus on that and leave everyone else the hell alone.
Carlos Hathcock
.450/400 Nitro Ex
That's because, as with most of the shit that flows out of that peanut cannister she calls a head, they've not thought beyond the political / PR aspect.
The teleprompter didn't say to. It Said "end speech here"
Carlos Hathcock
.450/400 Nitro Ex
Hochulsucks1234
.44 mag
You go back to Guiliani when he fixed the crime issues in NYC. He implemented some controversial measures that worked. Stop and frisk was one such measure. It was deemed racist by the liberals. I am not a 100% supporter of it as it does violate the 4th Amendment, which everyone has a protection under. If they enhanced it more with a concrete probable cause, it could be effective. The one method proposed (and used) is facial recognition. It is part of the Orwellian way, but they would be implemented in cities where surviellance is already out of control. If a suspicious person is tagged, it gives the police the ability to stop people. But that would mean the police were doing their job, which liberals hate. Not to mention, what cop wants to now considering the risk of having to use force and being destroyed as a result of it.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Oh good, it's just illegal guns.
Modean
.223 Rem
Sure, but they get to decide what guns are illegal....
kev74
20×102mm Vulcan
I thought this was a sanctuary state... Nothing's illegal any more.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Sarcasm.
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
People like you and I wouldn’t be stopped and frisked but if you had gang colors or looked the part yes. I’m pretty sure the racist liberals have brought it back in NYC.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Stop and frisk was not under Guiliani. That was under Bloomberg and Ray Kelly. Guiliani and Bill Bratton did something more novel—- enforce the law. Enforce small stuff and the criminals won’t be around to do the bigger stuff. That simple.
Probably.
doesn't her gestapo already tail NY'ers into PA to see what they are doing? Or lurk around at nearby gun stores in PA looking for NY plates?
I can see permanent "border patrol" checkpoints all along the PA/NY border, similar to the one just north of @spat
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
No. It is true Gouliani's crew started the broken window enforce all law policy but the Giuliani administration did in fact enact the "stop, question and frisk" in the mid-'90s.
NYPD Commissioners William Bratton, Howard Safir and Bernie Kerik developed the program for Giuliani. In this initial effort, after a complaint in a statistically high crime area, officers would stop and frisk about a hundred thousand perps a year (with most encounters leading to a finding).
Bloomberg's adminstration jacked it up to over half a million stop and frisks while dropping any correlation to crime stats or complaints with most encounters on innocents.
Rudy Giuliani says Bloomberg took stop-and-frisk policy too far: 'We understood the law'
Presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg cannot run away from his controversial stop and frisk policing, former NYC mayor and attorney for President Trump Rudy Giuliani said Tuesday.
www.foxnews.com
Last edited:
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Stop and frisk form ( it’s an actual form used for a terry stop) had been around since the late 1970s/early 80s. It’s original intent was if a person was suspected of a crime but probable cause couldn’t be established yet( having to let the person go) , the detectives would have a place to start.No. It is true Gouliani's crew started the broken window enforce all law policy but the Giuliani administration did in fact enact the "stop, question and frisk" in the mid-'90s.
NYPD Commissioners William Bratton, Howard Safir and Bernie Kerik developed the program for Giuliani. In this initial effort, after a complaint in a statistically high crime area, officers would stop and frisk about a hundred thousand perps a year (with most encounters leading to a finding).
Bloomberg's adminstration jacked it up to over half a million stop and frisks while dropping any correlation to crime stats or complaints with most encounters on innocents.
Rudy Giuliani says Bloomberg took stop-and-frisk policy too far: 'We understood the law'
Presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg cannot run away from his controversial stop and frisk policing, former NYC mayor and attorney for President Trump Rudy Giuliani said Tuesday.
For example, a teenager is caught carrying a TV at 3 in the morning but they don’t know what house he took it from. When the owner makes a stolen TV report in the morning, the detectives can match it up.
It was a model that many police departments followed . Only later was it used to punish officers where they would attempt to determine what officer stopped a certain individual who made a complaint.
The stop and frisk numbers were also off because most officers would not fill out the form if they made an arrest because the arrest justified the stop and why fill out extra paperwork.
Why is this well known in certain police circles? Because the form became the centerpiece of any federal decree over a police department. They would be required to have such a form and have it filled out on every terry stop.
The stop and frisk program as in those numbers became a “ quota” under Bloomberg. That program took on the name of the form . That’s why Guiliani is talking about a 600 % increase in the article . The stop and frisk program is over but even today if an NYPD cop does a terry stop , they have to fill out that form.
A lot of downstate departments fill out a form too.
This subject was a big deal in police circles and NYPD friends when that bias judge made her announcement and how the media lied and still lies about it.
Sort of how the media makes it like that Guiliani is well liked among NYPD officers who worked in the 1990s. Go to a cop bar and listen to the old timers talk about him. They curse his name . Love Bratton, hate Guiliani.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
It's been going on long before the 1968 SCOTUS Terry case. I grew up listening to relatives sharing stories about pretextual and systematic stops since the 50s.
I can't say I know any cop who thought highy of any mayor or governor but there are certainly mayors they hold in lower esteem than Giuliani and Bloomberg (both are considered egotistical narcissists).
My response was based on my being in a small room / vestibule a couple times (2002 and 2006) with Bloomberg and Giuliani privately bitching at each other with their own sense of history.
Last edited:
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
The NYPD cops who worked for Guiliani in the 1990s hate him because of all the work they did then got shafted in contract talks. They went from one of the highest paid departments in the 1980s to among one of the lowest in the area. That and other reasons .
As far as legacy , either one of them directly caused the decrease in crime. That was Bratton, who recognized a transit police lieutenant by the name of Jack Maple (Jack Maple - Wikipedia ) who promoted the broken windows theory in the subway and created the Comstat model where Bratton was the police chief before taking over the NYPD.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
The terry case was actually meant to be a way to rein in police officers, not give them the power to stop. It’s actually cited in Terry, a New York case as an example what not to do. In terry, the officer patted down the suspect, then felt an object, then went into the suspects pocket or waistband ( I can’t remember which) to retrieve the object. In the New York case, the police just went into the pockets without a frisk.
Before Terry, a police officer at the state or local level could just search someone without reason unless that state’s constitution forbid it. Remember that the bill of rights against search and seizure did not apply to the states until 1960.