The Stop And Frisk Policy

Every day people walk down the street of New York wondering if they are going to be stopped. Paul Butler a law professor at Georgetown University and a former United States Department of Justice prosecutor says that “the problem with stop and frisk is not only that it makes the citizens of New York less free, it also makes them less safe” (Butler, 2012). This brings the feeling of the people in New York to light, as they feel like they are less than others and less free with the ability to them being stopped and searched whenever an officer has a suspicion. Not all officers have the right sense in mind when it comes to their suspicion about someone, because “according to the analysis, just 1.5% of all stop-and-frisk arrests resulted in a jail or prison sentence. Just one in 50 stop-and-frisk arrests, 0.1%, led to a conviction for a violent crime or possession of a weapon. Close to half of all stop-and-frisk arrests did not result in a conviction” (Lee, 2013). The percentages show that officers’ suspicions aren’t always correct and that they may use their own stereotype about someone when they stop and frisk. This policy is ineffective because they don’t have a 100 percent on catching people, and many times officers’ own opinions on someone gets in the way. This policy is kept around for the little percentage it has worked and to give the officers an option to do a stop and frisk if they feel necessary. If this policy

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the pros and cons of the Stop and Frisk policy in New York. This paper covers a short history of Stop and Frisk. It also will address the progression of the policy throughout the years. Furthermore, it will relate the topic to the management, gender, and race class focusing in on how the unconscious bias plays a role in how the police choose who to stop. The paper also includes some statistics of Stop and Frisk encounters. It will conclude with the group opinion of the Stop and Frisk policy.

What are stop and frisk? Who is allowed to use stop and frisk? Haq tells us that stop and frisk is a "program that enables a police officer to stop, question, and frisk a person for weapons" (Haq). This means that the police officer can stop, search and question you at any time only if they have reasonable suspicion; but, only if they follow the proper protocol and guidelines. Stop and Frisk will promote safety not only for the officer but also in society. Many people may think that stop and frisk will promote racial profiling and that it will interfere with their fourth amendment but will it? Gun violence has been a big issue throughout the United States, we hear it on the news and in social media. Stop and frisk are an

The Center for Constitutional Rights filed the federal class action lawsuit Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et al. against the City of New York to challenge the New York Police Department’s practices of racial profiling and unconstitutional stop and frisks of New York City residents.

The “Stop and Frisk” program is a program established in several large cities that gives the right to law enforcement officials to stop and frisk any person on the street with reasonable cause. This program has taken over 6,000 guns off the street in New York since 2004. If it were to be stopped crime rates would go up, simply because people would now be able to carry weapons or any other illegal items and cops cannot stop and search/frisk them without a warrant or without seeing the item. As for violent crime falling with the stop of “Stop and Frisk” I do not really see that happening. Criminals are going to feel like they can walk the streets without worrying that they could get randomly stopped.

Stop and Frisk, originally originated from broken window policing which is to reduce crimes in neighborhoods, to restore order and reducing violent crimes within a persons community. The stop and frisk policy is actually part of the fourth amendment that requires a police officer to have a reasonable doubt that a crime is being, has being or is about to committed before even stopping a person or suspect for interrogations. If the police officer believes that the suspect is armed or suspicions or nervous about something related to a crime than they are allowed under the law to frisk the suspecting suspect. They do this by patting down a person from top to bottom on the outside of their clothing to feel if any weapon is being hidden upon the person.

Stop and frisk is about the study of different factors in a particular instance, not racial profiling. The Fourth Amendment guarantees all individuals the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. Warrantless searches and seizures are deemed unreasonable unless the given circumstances of the search fall under the exceptions to a warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment, as stated in Katz v. United States. Reasonable suspicion is a less demanding standard than probable cause needed for a search warrant, but is more than an inchoate suspicion or hunch but less than probable cause where, an officer my approach a person with the intent of investigating possible criminal behavior even if there is no probable cause to make an arrest, U.S. v. Sokolow. To determine whether an officer had an objective basis for stopping a person suspected of criminal activity, courts look at the totality of the circumstances, as

What is Stop and Frisk? The New York City stop-question-and-frisk program is a practice of the New York City Police Department by which police officers stop and question tens of thousands of pedestrians annually, and frisk them for weapons and other contraband (New York City Stop-question-frisk program). This program is said to keep weapons of the street but we are sure if their statements are accurate. Though the New York Police Department says this program helps keep weapons of the street, stop and frisk is unconstitutional because it does not help reduce crime and violets people of their rights.

The first article, “Police Make Life Hell for Youth of Color” discusses the stop and frisky policy in New York. Innocuous activities such as grocery shopping, visiting a friend or walking home from work or school are suspicious activities if performed by the African- American or Latino communities. The stop and frisk policy is a systematic weapon that policemen utilize against ethnic people-even children.

The stop-question-and-frisk program, also known as “stop-and-frisk” is a policy that was enacted in New York. In this policy, law enforcement has the right to stop and question a pedestrian and frisk them for weapons or other illegal items. Based off of statistics, personal statements, and the publics opinions, the stop and frisk policy has little to no effect on combatting and reducing crime.

In Philadelphia stop and frisk is “a situation where a police officer who is suspicious of an individual stops and searches them for a concealed weapon or illegal substance.

Video two was a new report on the Stop-and-Frisk to determine if it was is a form or racial profiling or proactive policing. The video is debating the pros and cons of the Stop-and-Frisk in New York City. According the video the Commissioner Raymond Kelly says that major crime is down by 25% since he took office in 2002, and he feels that it is due to the availability of the stop-and-frisk tool that officers use over thousands of times a day. The controversy is that out of the thousands of times that it is used a day only 6$ lead to an arrest and only 1.2% of those lead to gun being confiscated. More controversy is that 84% of people stopped are young black men. This is leading to community that does not trust the police, one young man felt

What is stop and frisk? Who uses stop and frisk? According to Haq stop and frisk is a “program that enables a police officer to stop, question, and frisk a person for weapons”(1). This means that a police officer can only search someone if they possess reasonable suspicion and follow their guidelines. People should have open ideas of ways of reducing gun violence and not closing before hearing the proposals. People say that stop and frisk promote racial profiling and that it invades one’s privacy rights. Police officer are human being and make mistakes because no one is perfect in this Earth. Gun violence has been a main subject now a day, where you hear it on the news about a school shooting. Stop and frisk are an effective way to bring down crime rates in one’s city yet some people may think otherwise and think it’s not acceptable. The practice of stop and frisk is necessary to protect the people and to be capable to reduce crime off the streets; without it crime rates like gun violence would increase drastically.

Our Police officers performing stop and frisk is much like our national security and airport security when they stop everyone and check them. Our airport and national security search everyone in order to make sure that no crimes are being committed or about to be committed such as, terrorist attacks and drug trafficking. The same way by police officers doing stop and frisk helps prevent crime such as burglary, murder, and drug crimes. Stop and frisk could help stop terrorist attacks also say for instance if the national security or airport security misses something and the person ends up on the street ready to commit the vicious crime. In a fellow police officer notices the person doing something strange or acting in a strange manner and decides

One of the most controversial police procedure is stop and frisk. This policy occurs when a police officer comes face to face with a suspicious person and in effort attempt to seize crime with confrontational pat-down searches. A stop is considered temporary interference with a person’s liberty, while the frisk is a full body search for weapons. There’s a racial discrimination involved when violating constitutional