Stop and frisk is an unjust crime prevention that gives permission to provided police officers to stop a person and frisk them based on “reasonable suspicions” of possible criminal activities. Although nowadays it seems to be a way for police officers to harass people on the street specifically minorities. From this program, minorities experienced police interrogations, physical assault, and even arrests, only to establish innocence in court. Despite being declared unconstitutional in 2013, there’s an ongoing discussion in the news to bring it back and not just in New York but in other major cities as well. Stop and frisk is a prejudiced program that should not be reinstituted in America.
Stop and frisk was first introduced as legal through …show more content…
Scheindlin, agreed and concluded in the Floyd v City of New York court case in 2013 that stop and frisk is unconstitutional since its unconscious bias as well as it violating our 4th amendment, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. Scheindlin explains, “Unconscious bias could help explain the otherwise puzzling fact that NYPD officers check ‘Furtive Movements’ in 50% of the stops of blacks and 35% of the stops of Hispanics, but only 10% of the stops of whites. There is no evidence that black people’s movements are objectively more furtive than the movements of white people” (qtd. in The Constitutionality of Stop and Frisk). Thus, after 45 years of legal harassment from the NYPD, Scheindlin ultimately put an end to it. After the decrease of stop and frisk in 2013, the following years had the lowest crime rates New York has ever seen. In “A Report on Arrests Arising From the New York City Police Department’s Stop and Frisk Practices” found on the NYS Attorney General Civil Rights Bureau quotes stop and frisk supporter, Then Mayor Bloomberg, who proudly announced to the public, “Murder was down 32 percent compared to the year before and that if you compare the first-third of this year to when we came into office, it’s down 56 percent. And shootings also are down 22 percent compared to last year’s record low.” Bloomberg then proclaimed …show more content…
Trump during the first presidential debate specified that he would bring stop and frisk back into the US, especially Chicago and Atlanta. He then insists, “We did it in New York, it worked incredibly well and you have to be proactive and, you know, you really help people sort of change their mind” (qtd. in What Donald Trump Got Wrong on Stop and Frisk). But did it essentially work astoundingly well? The data shows a massive decrease in crime occurred after the stop of the program. In 2012 the year before the end of stop and frisk, there were approximately 650 shootings in the first six months; whereas in 2016, three years after stop and frisk, there was roughly 440 shootings in the first six months. In four years the shooting decreased by 210. Another matter Trump brought up during the debate was stop and frisk brought murders down and without it “Murder is up.” Again from previous data, we observe in 2011 there were roughly 515 murders, whereas in 2015 there were about 352 homicides. The murder rate dropped a significant 33% from 2011-2015, according to an article published on New York Times titled “What Trump Got Wrong on Stop and Frisk.” Considering all the statistics, its fair enough to claim that stop and frisk is not the solution to cutback crime anywhere in the United
Stop and frisk was first introduced as legal through …show more content…
Scheindlin, agreed and concluded in the Floyd v City of New York court case in 2013 that stop and frisk is unconstitutional since its unconscious bias as well as it violating our 4th amendment, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. Scheindlin explains, “Unconscious bias could help explain the otherwise puzzling fact that NYPD officers check ‘Furtive Movements’ in 50% of the stops of blacks and 35% of the stops of Hispanics, but only 10% of the stops of whites. There is no evidence that black people’s movements are objectively more furtive than the movements of white people” (qtd. in The Constitutionality of Stop and Frisk). Thus, after 45 years of legal harassment from the NYPD, Scheindlin ultimately put an end to it. After the decrease of stop and frisk in 2013, the following years had the lowest crime rates New York has ever seen. In “A Report on Arrests Arising From the New York City Police Department’s Stop and Frisk Practices” found on the NYS Attorney General Civil Rights Bureau quotes stop and frisk supporter, Then Mayor Bloomberg, who proudly announced to the public, “Murder was down 32 percent compared to the year before and that if you compare the first-third of this year to when we came into office, it’s down 56 percent. And shootings also are down 22 percent compared to last year’s record low.” Bloomberg then proclaimed …show more content…
Trump during the first presidential debate specified that he would bring stop and frisk back into the US, especially Chicago and Atlanta. He then insists, “We did it in New York, it worked incredibly well and you have to be proactive and, you know, you really help people sort of change their mind” (qtd. in What Donald Trump Got Wrong on Stop and Frisk). But did it essentially work astoundingly well? The data shows a massive decrease in crime occurred after the stop of the program. In 2012 the year before the end of stop and frisk, there were approximately 650 shootings in the first six months; whereas in 2016, three years after stop and frisk, there was roughly 440 shootings in the first six months. In four years the shooting decreased by 210. Another matter Trump brought up during the debate was stop and frisk brought murders down and without it “Murder is up.” Again from previous data, we observe in 2011 there were roughly 515 murders, whereas in 2015 there were about 352 homicides. The murder rate dropped a significant 33% from 2011-2015, according to an article published on New York Times titled “What Trump Got Wrong on Stop and Frisk.” Considering all the statistics, its fair enough to claim that stop and frisk is not the solution to cutback crime anywhere in the United