Eighty-seven percent of stops in 2012, were Black and Hispanic people. Compare that percentage to the amount of water on Earth, only seventy percent. Now, imagine eighty-seven percent water covering the Earth. That would make the world unbalanced and difficult to live in, which is how life is for the minorities impacted by Stop and Frisk. One of the most debated and controversial topics in New York City is the Stop and Frisk policy, and the impact it has on police, Latinos, and African Americans. Stop and Frisk fails to promote justice and equitable society because it creates a society where one group is lesser than another. The Stop and Frisk policy was created in Ohio, 1968, because of the a Supreme Court case, Terry v. Ohio (US Courts). The Stop and Frisk policy was already being acted out by police officers before this court case but it helped determine when a stop and search is constitutional based on the Fourth Amendment, “Under [the] Fourth Amendment case law, a constitutional Search and Seizure must be based on Probable Cause” (US Courts). In Terry v. Ohio an officer dressed in plain clothes stopped three men who looked like they were preparing to rob a store. The officer asked them what they were doing and wasn’t happy with their response which resulted in him frisking one of the men. This man ended up having an unlicensed gun. So, Terry took the state of Ohio to court because he believed his Fourth Amendment was violated, he lost because the court ruled that the officer’s intentions were to prevent a crime. Stop and Frisk negatively impacts Black and Latinos in New York City, because it promotes institutional racism which then leads to negative psychological damages on these victimized minorities.
Stop and Frisk uses t...
... middle of paper ...
...nham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2009. N. pag. 2009. Web. 2 Jan. 2014.
PBS Newshour."Stop and Frisk:An In Depth Introduction”. 11.1.13.
Randal,Vernellia.“What Is Institutional Racism?”University of Dayton,7 April 2009. Web date Accessed.
Smith,William A,Yosso,TaraJ.,and Solorzano, Daniel G.“Challenging Racial Battle Fatigue on Historically White Campuses:A Critical Race Examination of Race-Related Stress.”Ed.RodneyD.Coates.New York:Brill.2011.Web.
“What Does the Fourth Amendment Mean?”USCourt.Web.DateAccessed.
9 Apr. 2014. The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'. Web. The Web. The Web.
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.
City of New York: The difficulty of proving fourteenth amendment violation” by David Clark, he writes about how the stop and frisk violated the fourth and fourteenth amendment by providing statistics. In this reading he mentions, “Although, these Fourth Amendment holdings are important, the most controversial holdings relate to the discriminatory intent behind the policy and the Fourteenth Amendment violation by the New York Police Department (N.Y.P.D.) in the way they carried out their stop and frisk program.” (Clark 342) which is true, because according to the fourth amendment no person should be searched or seized without warrant, unless it’s an reasonable suspicions and under the fourteenth amendment which protects individuals life, property and liberty which should not be violated by any governmental officials. However during stop and frisk police officers not just violating a person fourth amendment, but they also discriminating and abusing the humans rights. No person should receive a physical and verbal abuse, first and foremost it’s not just a discrimination, but also emotional and mental breakdown of the individual who is stopped and frisk even if the person is innocent. Clark also mentions “police departments can and should be better incentivized to follow protections offered by the Constitution with a Fourteenth Amendment exclusionary rule for unlawful, racially selective stops.” (Clark 343) meaning that
Stop and Frisk is a procedure put into use by the New York Police Department that allows an officer to stop and search a “suspicious character” if they consider her or him to be. The NYPD don’t need a warrant, or see you commit a crime. Officers solely need to regard you as “suspicious” to violate your fourth amendment rights without consequences. Since its Beginning, New York City’s stop and frisk program has brought in much controversy originating from the excessive rate of arrest. While the argument that Stop and Frisk violates an individual’s fourth amendment rights of protection from unreasonable search and seizure could definitely be said, that argument it’s similar to the argument of discrimination. An unfair number of Hispanics and
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...
One of the biggest reason stop-and-frisk should be abolished is in hopes to decrease such blatant racial profiling that has been going on under the name of “stop-and-frisk”. In 2007, 55% of the people stopped in New York were blacks and 30% were Hispanic (“Update: Crime and Race”). When checked again in 2011 a total of 685,000 people were stopped by the police of that 685,000, 52.9% were African Americans, 33.7% were Latino, and 9.3% were white (“Racial Profiling”). There is a story of an innocent victim of the stop-and-frisk policy, a man by the name of Robert Taylor. Police in Torrance stopped the elderly man and claimed he fit the description of a suspect that was linked to a robbery. But there was one simple problem; Taylor is a light complexioned, tall, 60 year-old man and the suspect was believed to be a short, dark complexioned, stocky man in his thirties; nothing like Taylor at all (Hutchinson). His shows that the police do not always stop people based on the right reasons, they tend to stop people based on the color of thei...
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.... ...
"The Reality of Racial Profiling." CivilRights.org. The Leadership Conference, 22 08 2012. Web. 4 Mar. 2014. .
Racial profiling is the most idiotic and arrogant thing you can ever do as a person. Usually the people who are affected by racial profiling are minorities, however, any person can be a victim of racial profiling. Some may think that racial profiling is non-existent, however, I would like to bring the situation into focus and show that it is still in existence and has been observed in the past and now in the current year. Although, more than fifty percent of the time racial profiling is conducted it is against a man or woman of color; an African-American in other words. There are instances where a white person can be a victim as well. Trying not to say that there isn't any person out there that is exempted from racial profiling, because there isn't a single person who is just exempted from this cruel method of decision making. In my essay I will talk about racial profiling and what it is, however, you can't forget about where it happens and of course why. Several resolutions will be discussed in this essay to alleviate this problem.
Every day you see and hear about minorities groups complain about cops and their tactics against them stopping them while in traffic taking them in to custody or even getting kill over nothing. Racial Profiling is a common thing in this community and it is causing a lot of trouble. According to Minnesota House of Representatives analyst Jim Cleary, "there appear to be at least two clearly distinguishable definitions of the term 'racial profiling ': a narrow definition and a broad definition... Under the narrow definition, racial profiling occurs when a police officer stops, questions, arrests, and/or searches someone solely on the basis of the person 's race or ethnicity... Some ways to stop it is find out who is guilty of it, look at their
Did you know that Institutions throughout NYC are legally violating Black and Hispanic citizens civil rights? These circumstances are the result of the NYPD’s attempt to protect the greater good of NYC; Stop and Frisk is the policy that attempts to accomplish this matter at hand. Stop and Frisk constantly targets Black and Hispanic citizens, therefore it does not promote a just and equitable society due to it viewing these ethnicities as more likely to commit a crime. The origin of Stop and Frisk traces back to the Supreme Court case of Terry V. Ohio, which took place in 1968. Terry, an experienced plainclothes officer, stopped and frisked three suspicious men; one produced a gun with no permit. This Supreme Court case essentially claimed Stop and Frisk to be constitutional under the Fourth Amendment (PBS Newshour). Stop and Frisk can essentially limits the rights of certain individuals because it gives the NYPD permission to avoid the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. The NYPD is given permission to stop and frisk an individual under the circumstances of probable cause: if an article or substance capable of causing serious physical injury or is not ordinarily carried in pubic places by law-biding persons is present and in plain view, or if the stop and frisk is supported by oath of affirmation (FindLaw). Stop and Frisk negatively impacts Black and Hispanic citizens in NYC because it promotes institutional racism.
Pritchard, Justin. "Racial Profiling Exists, but What Does It Mean?." Las Vegas Review-Journal (Las Vegas, NV). Jan. 14 2001: 34A+. SIRS Issues Researcher.
Law Enforcement policy is designed to help law enforcement agencies cut down on the amount of crime in communities and give structure to the agency. It also helps lessen the number of certain cases in certain areas, as well as from a certain group of people. There are several policies that I disagree with, but there is one policy I will be discussing. Law enforcement officers sometimes stop and frisk people based on gender, race, financial status, and social ranking. It is a very controversial issue because anything dealing with race and ethnicity can cause a lot of disagreement and discord. According to a New York judge on dealing with the stop and frisk laws, "If you got proof of inappropriate racial profiling in a good constitutional case, why don't you bring a lawsuit? You can certainly mark it as related . . . . I am sure I am going to get in trouble for saying it, for $65 you can bring that lawsuit" (Carter, 2013, pp.4). The stop and frisk law is one reason I do not believe in law enforcement profiling. Even though some law enforcement officers allow personal feelings and power to allow them to not follow policy, some policies are not followed morally because I do not feel that officers should be allowed to frisk someone who is innocent and has not committed a crime because it takes the focus off real criminals and onto innocent people; it causes emotional stress. I know because I have been through this several times.