Should The Stop And Frisk Policy Increase Crime?

Often times, once an individual enters into the criminal justice system, they run the risk of losing employment if they are employed which can potentially increase the unemployment rate. Their families will suffer, for example bills will go unpaid, increasing the chance of services being disconnected, forcing some into poverty and to depend on the government for assistance. Seeking government unemployment funds, food stamps, rental assistance, and health care all are systems that require money. Families can lose their homes sending them into a state of homelessness increasing the population and the crime in the shelters. Children can potentially be taken away from their parents due to the inability to provide a safe environment for them. Removing children can result in children placed into foster care, increasing the states responsibility for another child. If an offender is required to go to trial, that will increase the tax payers responsibility. The officer involved is receiving overtime due to having to appear in court which all increase revenue for the court system and the law enforcement community. Once the offender is tried and possibly found guilty he will enter the correctional system which increases the population in the prison system.
The use of this policy has a stigma attached. Once labeling an individual as deviant this could …show more content…
Those who are in favor of the policy say, “Low hit rates and arrest rates indicate that stop and frisk is reducing crime by deterring would be offenders” (La Vigene, Lachman, Rao & Matthews, 2014). “critics of stop and frisk, by contrast, view low hit and arrest rates as an indication that stop and frisk is failing to have its intended crime control impact because it is targeting mostly innocent people” (La Vigene, Lachman, Rao & Matthews,