Pros And Cons Of Stop And Frisk

Stop and Frisk

Stop and frisk is a brief, non-intrusive, police stop of a suspicious individual. The Fourth Amendment entails that the police have a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been, or is in progress before stopping a suspect. If the officer realistically is certain that the person is carrying a weapon and is dangerous, the officers can conduct a search, a rapid pat down of the suspect’s exterior clothing. A law enforcement officer may stop and briefly detain a person for investigatory purposes if the officer has a reasonable suspicion supported by articulable facts of impending criminal activity. Reasonable suspicion is less demanding than probable cause, less quantity of evidence or information is needed. Reasonable suspicion can come from information less reliable than needed for probable cause.

There many levels of intrusion when it comes to stop and frisk. The first level of intrusion is a method to request evidence, allowable only when there is an objective believable reason for an intervention. Police do not necessarily need to suspect criminal activity. The second level of intrusion is known as the common-law right to inquire and is permissible only when the officer has a founded suspicion that criminal activity is afoot. This is a larger intrusion since the officer can interfere with a citizen in an effort to gain explanatory information. However, at this level the intrusion must fall short of a forcible search. The third level of intrusion is sanctioned when an officer has a reasonable suspicion that a particular person has committed, or is about to commit an offense or misdemeanor. At this level, an officer is also authorized to make a forcible stop and detain the citizen for questioning. Furthermore, an ...

... middle of paper ...

...ack and Latino communities remain to be the overwhelming aim of these procedures. Nearly nine out of 10 stopped-and-frisked New Yorkers have been completely innocent, according to the NYPD’s own reports. Linking police stops to violent crime suspects is a bad calculation. Only 11 percent of stops in 2011 were founded to be on an account of a felony suspect and from 2002 to 2011, black and Latino citizens made up close to 90 percent of individuals stopped, and about 88 percent of stops, more than 3 million, were innocent New Yorkers. Even in areas that are mostly white, black and Latino New Yorkers face the inconsistent burden. For instance, in 2011, African American citizens and Latino New Yorkers made up over 24 percent of the residents of Park Slope, but they also made up 79 percent of all the stops made by the NYPD. Making Stop-and-Frisk clearly discriminatory.