Thursday, June 11, 2009

Your own argument

I agree with the findings of the Supreme Court and think personally General Order 92 -4 was a disguised to hide Chicago’s true intentions of profiling gang members. Even if you were not a gang member you could be affected by a cop who is having a bad day ordering you to disperse. "Justice O’Connor, joined by Justice Breyer, concluded that, as construed by the Illinois Supreme Court, the Chicago ordinance is unconstitutionally vague because it lacks sufficient minimal standards to guide law enforcement officers; in particular, it fails to provide any standard by which police can judge whether an individual has an “apparent purpose.”(Chicago v. Morales, 1999) They want a person to show apparent purpose, my question is what if me going to the park to relax is my purpose what then? As a tax payer I or anyone else for that matter has the right to enjoy a public place hence the word public. If I a student can clearly see the injustice in Chicago’s tactics then so can anyone else, and the Supreme Court to me shouldn’t have to tell Police Officers that it is unconstitutional and wrong as a whole. I’ve attempted to keep my personal views out of this and state just the facts, but the fact is that a Chicago is known for its ramped gang problem as well as a series of events that has risen to the top and is overflowing into the streets. For a long time Chicago has been the hub for criminal activity in the Midwest and Police stand on equal footing as gang members in their participation. To me it’s a case of we can’t sweep this under the rug anymore and no longer hold the leash on a problem Chicago created.

No comments:

Post a Comment