Quote:
Originally Posted by golfing eagles
Sorry, but just being there is not suspicious. But apparently the grievance industry was able to parlay that into a lame excuse to end an effective policing tool
|
If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck and it swims like a duck and it smells like a duck then sure, you could make an argument that it really is a hippopotamus in disguise.
The grievance industry looked at the data and the data told the story. I have no interest in researching all the statistics but the few that I've seen indicated that weapons were found in about 14 out of every 10,000 stops for "suspicious activity" and there was some kind of fine, arrest, or seizure of a weapon in only about 1,200 out 10,000 stops. If your "suspicious activity" sensor fails 88% of the time and is only effective at removing weapons 0.14% of the time then that sensor is seriously broken.
Was it an effective policing tool? I don't believe the numbers will back that up in an objective way. Subjectively, sure, harassment is an effective tool. But that goes back to my initial post: Is it okay because you know as a white man it won't affect you? Is it okay because you haven't thought about how else it might be used? Or, is it okay because you don't value your fourth amendment rights?