Lester Holt says stop and frisk is unconstitutional, but it's not!

In the recently concluded presidential debate, Donald Trump said Chicago's soaring murder rate could be cut by implementing a stop and frisk policy and that such a policy did wonders to reduce New York City's crime rate.  Thereupon, debate moderator and liberal media fact-checker Lester Holt interjected and informed the 100 million viewers watching the debate that stop and frisk is unconstitutional. Sorry, but the Holt was wrong. To begin with, Trump was correct in noting that stop and frisk was effective in reducing crime, particularly violent gun-related crime in New York City.  Looking at the evidence, former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani claims that this policy played a major role in reducing crime in the Big Apple by 85% from 1994 to 2014.  As Giuliani says, stop and frisk helped transform New York from being the crime capital of America to one of the safest cities in the country.  And since six out of ten murder victims in New York...(Read Full Post)
You must be logged in to comment.
Register