Huzzah! Parks Employees Can Talk To The Press Again by Garth Johnston : Gothamist

Read original...

Back in January, the Parks Department sent out a letter to its employees with the stern warning that, "No matter how short or simple the answer may seem, employees must not engage in conversation about Parks to those who identify themselves as reporters." That controversial directive, which the NYCLU argued violated worker's First Amendment rights, have now been clarified.

A new directive from the Department says that Parks employees can speak to the press as long as they do so on their own behalf, on their own time and without disclosing confidential information—good thing we took our own photos of the High Line!

According to Parks spokeswoman Vickie Karp, the change came because "It was brought to our attention that the introduction to the policy could be clearer so the introduction was clarified."

Geoffrey Croft of NYC Park Advocates, however, doesn't quite buy that excuse. "They are clearly trying to cover up a host of issues," he tells us. "Obviously a lot of employees are fed up. The policy is absurd. They know fully well these are not issues of confidentiality. They are just trying to stem the avalanche of negative publicity. Obviously its not working."

The new press policy, included below courtesy of NYC Park Advocates, is effective immediately

Press Policy Clarification 5-10-11

Totally Unnecessary Library Anti-Porn Bill Introduced by Jamie Feldmar - Gothamist

Remember how some people are really convinced that kids are watching tons of porn at the library? And how that's not actually the case, like, at all*? Well, turns out a few Councilmen didn't get the message, and they'reintroducing a bill that would make it a misdemeanor to watch porn within 100 feet of a child in a public library.

Council Members David G. Greenfield and Eric Ulrich were spurred to sponsor the bill "to protect minors from sexual predators who are accessing pornography on the Internet in full view of children," after New York's public libraries supposedly "refused to use Internet filters to block pornographic websites from view." But we could have sworn that the library's computers are fitted with privacy screens and do have a filter, one that's so strong it actually sometimes blocks even non-porn websites by accident!

Furthermore, "I have had a number of outraged constituents call me about their children encountering perverts viewing pornography in full view of library patrons," claims Councilman Greenfield. We're still awaiting comment from the Brooklyn libraries, but Queens Library spoksewoman Joanne King says the libraries receive "so few complaints about this issue that it's practically nonexistent," echoing similar feedback made by the NYPL.

What's next, Councilmen? Taking art books off of shelves because they show a bit of nipple? "l am a strong supporter of our public libraries and the value and rich experiences that they provide to New Yorkers," said Councilman Greenfield. "Part of that experience, however, should not be traumatizing children by exposing them to sexual predators and debasing pornography.

*A library spokeswoman tells us that they have gotten "almost zero" complaints about minors using computers to look at porn, "no matter what an anonymous patron says." She further explained that blocked sites make up a whopping .5% of their internet use, and of that .5%, they're not even all porn! Sometimes, for example, art websites with nudity get blocked, because the library's filter is so strong. On top of that, without strictly "monitoring" what people are watching, library staffers keep a close eye on computers in general and, just like the MTA, "if they see something, they'll say something. Minors are not allowed to watch porn in our libraries, period," wrote NYPL Public Relations director Angela Montefinise in a statement.

Welcome to NYC, "Marijuana Arrest Capital of the World" By John Del Signore - Gothamist

Read original...

Last year the NYPD arrested 50,383 people for low-level marijuana offenses, making low-level pot possession the number one cause of arrest in NYC. On average, nearly 140 people are arrested every day for marijuana possession in NYC, according to stats released by the New York Division of Criminal Justice Services and obtained by the Drug Policy Alliance. The announcement from the reformist group also comes with a friendly reminder that possession of 25 grams or less of marijuana was decriminalized 30 years ago. Not that this stops cops from arresting you for it. Here's how they do it, according to the DPA:

Possession of 25 grams or less of marijuana was decriminalized - that is, it was made a violation, with the first offense facing a maximum penalty of a $100 fine, not arrest and jail. Marijuana burning or "in public view" was made a criminal offense, a misdemeanor. Most people arrested for marijuana possession were not smoking in public; most simply had a small amount of marijuana in their pocket, purse or bag.

Possessing a small amount of marijuana in one's pocket or bag is a legal violation, not a criminal offense. But quite often, when police stop and question a person, they say "empty your pockets" or "open your bag." Many people comply with the officer's request. If a person pulls marijuana from their pocket or bag, it makes the marijuana "open to public view," a crime. The police then arrest the person for this misdemeanor.

So the solution's simple—if you're holding, just politely decline to empty your pockets. The officer will defer to your nuanced grasp of the law and respect your right to privacy, and you'll be on your merry way! Gabriel Sayegh at the Drug Policy Alliance elaborates: "A full search—in which the person stopped is required to empty his pockets, or where an officer puts his hands in an individual's pocket or otherwise goes beyond the pat down of outer clothing for the purpose of determining if there is a weapon (the 'frisk')—this requires probable cause, that is, enough evidence to justify an arrest.

"What is happening with many of the arrests is that police are ordering people to empty their pockets, discovering marijuana, and then arresting people for marijuana—but where was the probable cause for the arrest in the first place? Answer: There wasn’t any. If an officer has stopped someone and says, 'empty your pockets,' the person can ask, 'Am I under arrest?' If not, you are free to go. If the police say you’re being arrested, then they can go into your pockets (conduct a full search), but legally speaking, they have to have probable cause to arrest you in the first place and possession of marijuana isn’t a criminal act.

"In short, people can not empty their pockets, but the cops might get a bit miffed by this, and that could be more problematic than actually just cooperating. Either way, people should always say 'I don’t consent to a search.' " Especially if you've got a nice fat doobie in your trousers. But whatever you do, just don't run.