Surprised that there's no thread on this: NYC Passes Bills to Limit Racial Profiling

[No1]

June 27, 2013
Mayor’s Administration Moves to Undo Bill Aimed at Curbing Police Profiling
By J. DAVID GOODMAN and MICHAEL BARBARO
The Bloomberg administration immediately came out swinging on Thursday against a pair of bills approved by the City Council intended to oversee or curtail the Police Department, vowing to veto the measures and to do what it could to ensure that at least one of the vetoes would stand.

In separate appearances, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and his police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, sought to portray the bills — one aimed at increasing oversight of the Police Department and the other at expanding the ability to sue over racial profiling by officers — as a divisive tool that would undermine the police’s efforts to get guns off the streets and continue to lower the murder rate.

The threat of lawsuits, the city fears, could end the department’s broad use of stop-and-frisk measures, the crime-fighting tool most closely associated with the Bloomberg administration.

Behind the scenes, the mayor’s office was already strategizing how to undo the profiling bill.

Aides to the mayor, who made little attempt to hide their fury over the two bills, which are known together as the Community Safety Act, conceded there was little chance of derailing the inspector general bill, which passed by a sizable margin. But they are determined to scuttle the profiling legislation; it drew the precise number of votes required to override a veto, in what will no doubt serve as a test of Mr. Bloomberg’s political potency in the waning days of his term.

The mayor’s plan is to peel off one supporter, thus depriving the Council of the 34 votes needed to override the inevitable veto.

“People may vote for a bill and then be willing to maintain the mayor’s veto,” Mr. Bloomberg said at a news conference. He declined to say how he might persuade one council member to switch positions, saying only: “This is a fight to defend your life and your kids’ lives. You can rest assured that I will not give up for one minute.”

With the city’s annual budget already passed, Mr. Bloomberg has lost a major tool of persuasion in his negotiations with council members. But the popular and wealthy mayor still has a sizable arsenal at his disposal, starting with the promise of his future political support, not to mention the traditional carrots and sticks that any City Hall can wield.

Deputy Mayor Howard Wolfson said that in its discussions with council members, the administration would make its case on the merits of the bill. “We’ve had many conversations with members in the past days and weeks, and we will continue to do so,” Mr. Wolfson said.

Those conversations before the vote were also focused on policy and did not include overt political arm-twisting, said Councilman Brad Lander, one of the bills’ sponsors. “I didn’t hear anyone say they had been offered something or threatened with something,” he said.

Even so, Mr. Lander said, it had been a challenge for members to stand firm in the face of pressure from City Hall. “They kept pushing back and pushing back and pushing back, and this is a mayor who is accustomed to being listened to,” he said.

Councilman Erik M. Dilan, who kept his decision to support both measures mostly private until he voted with the rest of the Council around 2 a.m., said he had been courted heavily by Mr. Kelly during a nearly 45-minute sit-down several weeks ago in the commissioner’s office at Police Headquarters. He said he later received a “very pleasant” call from the mayor.

“He said, ‘I would love your vote, we would love your vote in the worst way,’ ” Mr. Dilan said, recalling his conversation with Mr. Bloomberg. But the councilman said he remained less persuaded by their arguments than by the high number of police stops going on in his district, which covers some crime-prone areas of Brooklyn.

“The vote that I made was based on where my conscience is,” Mr. Dilan said. “It’s hard for that to change. But to say it’s impossible based on new information, it’s hard to say that.”

One bill, known as Intro. 1079, would create an independent inspector general to monitor and review police policy, conduct investigations and recommend changes to the department. The monitor would be part of the city’s Investigation Department alongside the inspectors general for other city agencies.

The law would go into effect on Jan. 1, leaving the matter of choosing the monitor to Mr. Bloomberg’s successor.

The other bill, Intro. 1080, would expand the definition of bias-based profiling to include age, gender, housing status and sexual orientation. It also would allow people to sue the Police Department in state court — not only for individual instances of bias, but also for policies that disproportionately affect people in any protected categories without serving a significant law enforcement goal.

But because the bill would allow potential plaintiffs to seek only intervention by the courts to force changes, and not monetary damages, it was not known yet if the measure would prompt a wave of lawsuits.

Supporters of the legislation were preparing for another round with the mayor and the challenging task of keeping a single member from bolting.

“They always just need one person,” said Councilman Jumaane D. Williams, Democrat of Brooklyn, the other sponsor of the bill. Mr. Williams said the strategy remained the same: sitting down individually with council members and going over the text of the bills.

“We don’t have the kind of money or visibility as the mayor,” he said. “But what we do have is truth and what is right.”

The legislation has already been a nettlesome issue in the Democratic race for mayor, especially for Christine C. Quinn, the Council speaker, who has faced a growing challenge to her early front-runner status. She supported the measure creating an inspector general for the Police Department, which passed by a vote of 40 to 11, but she opposed the other, on police profiling, which passed 34 to 17.

Mr. Bloomberg has 30 days to veto the bills.

At least one council member, Daniel Dromm of Queens, received a call from his local police station commander to protest the legislation ahead of the vote.

“They were deeply concerned about 250s and said they would be unable to perform them because of the profiling part of the reform,” said Councilman Dromm, referring to the police form used for street stops. “But for me, it’s the teeth of the reform; it’s the needed piece.” He voted for both bills.

Mr. Kelly said he understood that “people don’t like to be stopped,” but he characterized the policing tool as a “lifesaver, something that’s integral to policing, something that you have to be able to do as a police officer on the streets of this city, or any other city.”

Legitimate police stops would not be curtailed under the legislation, Mr. Williams said. “The profiling bill doesn’t stop the police from stopping people,” he said. “It just stops profiling.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/n...sures.html?hp&pagewanted=all&pagewanted=print

With all that said, we'll see how long it lasts. I wonder if they'll have enough to beat Bloomberg's veto. People are looking suspect.

 

[Mikael Blowpiff]

Ray Kelly can eat 250 dikks

 

[daze23]

People are looking suspect.

that's why they get stopped and frisked

 

[No1]

that's why they get stopped and frisked

Well played sir. Just as I'm entering my apt. and you got me laughing at the door haha.

 

[radio rahiem]

i saw r.kelly on the news this morning crying foul that they can't profile black-hispanic neighborhoods
there has to be better community relations with the pd instead of profiling
@BarNone i do believe the city council will override his veto

 

[MostReal]

 

[ExodusNirvana]

The NYPD and their filthy soldiers racially profile the citizens of this city, harass us with tickets when "quotas" need to be met, and have shot and killed innocent men, and brutalized the people all under the protection of the shield.

They have arrested over 400,000 people in 2012 on marijuana charges when the laws on the books only call for arrest on large amounts of herb. Ruined the lives of young men over a fukking PLANT, and then got the nerve to say that they're just enforcing the law, meanwhile ignoring the convenient fact that for decades when it's up for discussion, they are some of the loudest voices opposing legalization or decriminalization.

1,000,000 Police hours...FOR WEED. And that's DOWN 22%

How many cops in your lifetime you ever met were ok with legalizing herb or even ok with people smoking it? How many cops you know drink and/or smoke cigarettes? How many a$$hole cops have you met in your lifetime as opposed to real deal human beings who decided to help uphold the law?

These motherfukkers have openly admitted to not wanting excessively intelligent officers, who may, if given the chance, "rock the boat" or simply create a revolving door policy where they use the PD as a stepping stone to more constructive careers.

And their response to the complaints about this? That they are out there risking their lives and are not appreciated for it...

If you can't take the heat GET THE fukk OUT OF THE KITCHEN. Go serve the meal and take tips instead of complaining about the conditions of cookin it up because obviously you ain't built for it if you're complaining.

Half these pieces of shyt just trying to ride out the years to that 100k salary

Think for a moment: If there are less minorities (black and hispanic) arrested in NYC, will the funding from "the powers that be" continue? Will there be funding for new cops and equipment? New programs to "fight crime"? Will there be OT available? Or will the pigs bellies start growling??

Why the fukk should I respect you, when you're complaining about the risks of a duty that YOU...YOU signed up for??

And most of these dudes are fat fukking slobs!!

Half of em are "Georges Zimmermans" mad that "these a$$holes always get away"

I'm supposed to respect the man that puts my brothers in the system over bullshyt? Tainting his record and hindering his progress in our society?

A bunch of fukking bullies and power thirsty CACS, mad that their near limitless power is ever threatened. They are sexual offenders, racists, sociopaths, and cowards. We'll start respecting them when they admit just how flawed their organization is, upholding unjust laws that target people who are victims of Americas ignorance. Where is the NYPD when it comes time to address crime as a result of poverty and social inequality? Certainly not in DC where their voices can be heard.

You won't see Officer O'Grady or Det. Clemenza out there complaining that the blacks and hispanics are committing crimes because the system is and has been skewed against them. You'll hear em complain that they need more funding for the war on crime/drugs/terrorism/high donut prices though...

fukk THE NYPD AND ANYBODY WHO LOVE EM!!!

 

[Techniec]

^

 

[Slaimon Khan Shah]

Racism leads to the hellfire.