News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Shame on Y Combinator by tptacek on Tuesday October 18, 2016 @05:56PM (#12739086)
I live near the corner of Austin and Madison in Chicago (you seem familiar with the geography and that you'd know what that implies) and I do not believe it is the case that residents of that neighborhood have a general attitude of "let the police do whatever they need to to reduce crime". I can be more specific if we need to be.

More importantly, we have a Constitution precisely so that the residents of crime-stricken neighborhoods cannot simply vote to repeal protections they've stopped liking. By the way? If neighborhoods had that ability, I'm fairly certain Kenilworth would make a lot more use of it than Englewood.

Re:Shame on Y Combinator by nugget on Tuesday October 18, 2016 @07:22PM (#12739630)
Q: Was the police technique of “stop-and-frisk” found unconstitutional?

A: The practice is not unconstitutional, but a judge ruled in 2013 that New York City’s stop-and-frisk program was carried out in a manner that violated the U.S. Constitution.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/09/is-stop-and-frisk-unconstit...

Re:Shame on Y Combinator by tptacek on Tuesday October 18, 2016 @09:46PM (#12740344)
You are not responding to my comment.
Re:Shame on Y Combinator by nugget on Wednesday October 19, 2016 @01:17AM (#12741275)
Presumably if it was implemented in a Constitutional way then you wouldn't be as opposed to a community electing to self-impose it. I see that as extension of the community policing movement. As to what the voting majorities in these communities actually believe (or would vote for), I doubt it's possible to know unless put to the test (despite anecdotes from both of us).