The stop, question and frisk policy is one of the most widely known controversy in the whole of New York City for the past years. Since its creation, the ongoing conflict between the New York Police Department and the citizens has never been resolved. There were several attempts to prevent the use of this policy, but all were unsuccessful. The main idea of this paper is to show how stop, question and frisk became a conflict between the New York Police Department and the citizens of New York State.
The stop, question and frisk were a program made to amend the broken windows theory. This is a term used in the criminal justice system which simply means if a crime is left alone without the interference of a police officer, and the application of law, crime rate will continue to grow. Offenders will continue to break the law and commit higher classes of crime. The idea of stop and frisk was to help maintain a better community and preventing smaller petit crimes from forming a more serious one. This was also an idea to provide a practical police system. It all started with former mayor Dinkins and mayor Giuliani who invested money to carry out this policy. Furthermore, the main ideas which a police officer would follow are “Reasonable Suspicion” for a stop, question and frisk and “Probable Cause” for an arrest. An officer would have to stop, question and frisk an individual, when he/she observes that an illegal activity, “will occur” or “has occurred”, this would be reasonable suspicion. For an arrest to be made, an officer would have to find probable cause when an illegal activity is occurring. However, in the late 1990’s, after this policy became official, 30% of the crime rate was dropped. This was the positive side to this policy....
... middle of paper ...
...ing System, Inc. http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/31/justice/new-york-stop-frisk/ Goldstein, J. (2013) The New York Times Company http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/01/nyregion/court-blocks-stop-and-frisk-changes-for-new-york-police.html?_r=0 Flatow, N. (2005-2013) Center For American Progress Action Fund http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/11/14/2939311/appeals-panel-stop-frisk-judge-violate-ethics-rules/ The City Of New York (2013) http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/analysis_and_planning/crime_and_enforcement_activity.shtml Crime and Enforcement Activity in New York City (Jan 01- Jun 30, 2013) http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/analysis_and_planning/crime_and_enforcement_activity_jan_to_jun_2013.pdf Parascandola, R., Fermino, J., Gregorian, D. (2013) New York Daily News
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/stop-frisk-violated-rights-judge-article-1.1424287
Stop and Frisk is a practice that was put into play by which a police officer initiates a stop of an individual on the street supposedly based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity “Stop and frisk” and other discriminatory policing practices have spiraled out of control.
The judicial system in America has always endured much skepticism as to whether or not there is racial profiling amongst arrests. The stop and frisk policy of the NYPD has caused much controversy and publicity since being applied because of the clear racial disparity in stops. Now the question remains; Are cops being racially biased when choosing whom to stop or are they just targeting “high crime” neighborhoods, thus choosing minorities by default? This paper will examine the history behind stop and frisk policies. Along with referenced facts about the Stop and Frisk Policy, this paper will include and discuss methods and findings of my own personal field research.
Some policy supporters argued that the strategy reduce crime rate even though there are no empirical data to support their claim. This policy shed a light on the negative perception that community has regarding community policing. I chose the second article “An analysis of the new york city police department 's 'stop-and-frisk ' policy in the context of claims of racial bias” by Gelman Fagan & Kiss (2007) would assist me because it dealt with racial bias in community policing and its shows how certain minorities groups are racially profiled through the process of ‘stop-and frisk.’ My topic focuses on community policing and this policy will give an argued to know the route of the distrust communities has towards law enforcement
In 1990, there was a total of 2,245 murders in New York, but over the past nine years, this total has been less than 600 (NYCLU). However, there has not been evident proof that the stop-and-frisk procedure is the reason of the declination of the crime rate. Indeed, stop-and-frisk contributes to some downturn of crime but the number is not high enough for the citizen and police to rely on. Specifically, only 3% of 2.4 million stops result in conviction. Some 2% of those arrests – or 0.1% of all stops – led to a conviction for a violent crime. Only 2% of arrests led to a conviction for possession of a weapon (Gabatt, A., 2013). In other words, the decrease in crime due to stop-and-frisk is mostly due to the discovery of possessed of weapons. Therefore, stop-and- frisk is not an effective procedure to use because it does not represent a huge impact in people’s safety (Gabatt, A., 2013). The author has done research about how police base their initiation towards the procedure of stop-and-frisk. Researchers have found that stop-and-frisk is a crime prevention strategy that gives a police officer the permission to stop a person based on “reasonable suspicion” of criminal activity and frisk based on “reasonable suspicion” that the person is armed and dangerous. This controversy is mainly because of racial profiling. “Reasonable suspicion” was described by the court as “common sense” (Avdija, A., 2013). Although, the
The New York City Police Department enacted a stop and frisk program was enacted to ensure the safety of pedestrians and the safety of the entire city. Stop and frisk is a practice which police officers stop and question hundreds of thousands of pedestrians annually, and frisk them for weapons and other contraband. Those who are found to be carrying any weapons or illegal substances are placed under arrest, taken to the station for booking, and if needed given a summons to appear in front of a judge at a later date. The NYPD’s rules for stop and frisk are based on the United States Supreme Courts decision in Terry v. Ohio. The ruling in Terry v. Ohio held that search and seizure, under the Fourth Amendment, is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest. If the police officer has a “reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime” and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous”, an arrest is justified (Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, at 30).
“From 2005 to mid-2008, approximately eighty percent of total stops made were of Blacks and Latinos, who comprise twenty-five percent and twenty-eight percent of New York City’s total population, respectively. During this same time period, only about ten percent of stops were of Whites, who comprise forty-four percent of the city’s population” (“Restoring a National Consensus”). Ray Kelly, appointed Police Commissioner by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, of New York in 2013, has not only accepted stop-and-frisk, a program that allows law enforcers to stop individuals and search them, but has multiplied its use. Kelly argued that New Yorkers of color, who have been unevenly targeted un...
Mac Donald, Heather. "Stop the Killing, Keep "Stop-and-Frisk"" City-Journal. N.p., 23 July 2012. Web. 08 Nov. 2013.
This is the police practice of stopping, questioning, and searching for potential criminal suspects in vehicles or on the street based solely on their racial appearance (Human Rights Watch, 2000). This type of profiling has contributed to racially disproportionate drug arrests, as well as, arrests for other crimes. It makes sense that the more individuals police stop, question and search, the more people they will find with a reason for arrest. So, if the majority of these types of stop and frisk searches are done on a certain race, then it makes sense that that race would have a higher arrest rate.... ...
... to occur in predominated areas. People might say they’re being racially profiled, but if it’s in an area where mostly Hispanics, or African Americans live, then it’s not. Whatever the situation is, an officer must articulate the facts and see if there is reasonable suspicion to stop someone.
Racial Profiling has been used by law enforcement officials from early 60’s during the civil rights movement. The term “racial profiling” which was introduced to criticize abusive police practices against people of different race, ethnicity or national origin. One must assess how to understand the practice, and how to keep it distinct from other issues. Racial profiling is defined as “any police-initiated action that relies on the race, ethnicity, or national origin, rather than the behavior of an individual or information that leads the police to a particular individual who has been identified as being, or having been, engaged in criminal activity.” (Ramirez 5).
Police brutality is a very real problem that many Americans face today. The police carry an enormous burden each day. Police work is very stressful and involves many violent and dangerous situations. In many confrontations the police are put in a position in which they may have to use force to control the situation. There are different levels of force and the situation dictates the level use most of the time. The police have very strict rules about police use force and the manner in which they use it. In this paper I will try to explain the many different reason the police cross the line, and the many different people that this type of behavior effects. There are thousands of reports each year of assaults and ill treatment against officers who use excessive force and violate the human rights of their victims. In some cases the police have injured and even killed people through the use of excessive force and brutal treatment. The use of excessive force is a criminal act and I will try and explore the many different factors involved in these situations.
This essay will bring to light the problem of racial profiling in the police force and propose the eradication of any discrimination. The Fourth Amendment states “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Despite this right, multiple minorities across the country suffer at the hands of police officers through racial profiling; the singling out of a person or persons as the main suspect of a crime based on their race. Many people have also suffered the loss of a loved one because police believed the suspect to be a threat based on their races therefore the officers use their authority to take out the “threat”. Although racial profiling may make sense to police officers in the line of duty, through the eyes of the public and those affected by police actions, it is a form a racism that is not being confronted and is allowing unjust convictions and deaths.
The Stop and Frisk program, set by Terry vs. Ohio, is presently executed by the New York Police Department and it grant police officers the ability to stop a person, ask them question and frisk if necessary. The ruling has been a NYPD instrument for a long time. However, recently it has produced a lot of controversy regarding the exasperating rate in which minorities, who regularly fell under assault and irritated by the police. The Stop, Question and Frisk ruling should be implemented correctly by following Terry’s vs. Ohio guidelines which include: reasonable suspicion that a crime is about to be committed, identify himself as a police officer, and make reasonable inquires.
Walker, S., & Katz, C. (2012). Police in America: An Introduction (8th Edition ed.). New York:
Skolnick, J., Fyfe, J. (1993) Above the law: Police and the Excessive use of force. United States: The Free Press