Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The New York police department has a policy known as "stop-and-frisk". with the specifics of the policy, please discuss
Police and racial profiling
Police and racial profiling
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In New York there is a law called the Stop and Frisk this law promotes racial profiling because police are to confront a person they believe to be suspicious in order to stop or prevent a crime ("Stop And Frisk"). This type of search is limited and does not require a warrant. ("Stop And Frisk"). The police will stop and pat you down to check for any weapons or drugs that may be on the person in question to help deter criminal activity ("Stop And Frisk"). This law has received a lot of backlash since being instated because it is believed that this law has violated the rights of minority groups. Between January 2004 and June 2012 4.4 million stops took place 83% of the stopped population were minorities while 80% of those stops required no further action (Makarechi). …show more content…
v. City of New York was on the Stop and Frisk law. The trail judge was Judge Scheindlin who stated from the start of this trial, she understood that this trial was about rights that had been violated by police with minority groups which caused people to have more of distrust with cops (Weiser). This case was about the practices of the New York City police department and how they were practicing racial profiling with unconstitutional stop and frisks ("Floyd, Et Al. V. City Of New York, Et Al."). The plaintiffs in this case were David Floyd, David Ourlicht, Lalit Clarkson, and Deon Dennis (representatives of the Black and Latino New Yorkers who had been stopped without any cause) ("Floyd, Et Al. V. City Of New York, Et Al."). Judge Scheindlin was in charge of this case deemed the law stop and frisk unconstitutional in New York ("Floyd, Et Al. V. City Of New York, Et Al."). Judge Scheindlin stated in her opinion paper on the trail that the cops had resorted to a “policy of indirect racial profiling” in minority communities (Weiser). Will making stop and frisk unconstitutional help decrease racial profiling by police
City of New York, where in the summer of 2013 US District Court Judge Shira A. Scheindlin ruled in favor of African-American and Hispanic plaintiffs who had been stopped by police. In the plaintiffs ' Section 1983 class action against the city, Scheindlin considered evidence of a large number of unjustified police stops of citizens, as well as the ineffectiveness of the stops where only six percent of all stops resulted in any type of arrest and a much smaller percentage led to the discovery of any weapons. Scheindlin also evaluated studies showing that police officers were more likely to stop blacks and Latinos than whites (and with less justification). For example, in 2011, nearly 87 percent of all police stops were of blacks and Latinos, and overall, police were more likely to use force against blacks and Latinos. Further, she concluded that these discrepancies resulted from official policies. “Bartley, who is African-American, says his warnings about police harassment have become a daily ritual with his son and two daughters, a sentiment echoed by Yates and other African-American residents. He has told his teenage son and two daughters to take an ID with them before leaving home. If police stop them, they should keep their hands out of their pockets and not make sudden
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.
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).
Racial profiling is the tactic of stopping someone because of the color of his or her skin and a fleeting suspicion that the person is engaging in criminal behavior (Meeks, p. 4-5). This practice can be conducted with routine traffic stops, or can be completely random based on the car that is driven, the number of people in the car and the race of the driver and passengers. The practice of racial profiling may seem more prevalent in today’s society, but in reality has been a part of American culture since the days of slavery. According to Tracey Maclin, a professor at the Boston University School of Law, racial profiling is an old concept. The historical roots “can be traced to a time in early American society when court officials permitted constables and ordinary citizens the right to ‘take up’ all black persons seen ‘gadding abroad’ without their master’s permission” (Meeks, p. 5). Although slavery is long since gone, the frequency in which racial profiling takes place remains the same. However, because of our advanced electronic media, this issue has been brought to the American public’s attention.
“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...
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.... ...
Profiling is unconstitutional and violates civil rights. Police can search a person without a warrant if they have reasonable doubt that they are armed and dangerous; however, of people who are pulled over while driving, less than 4% of whites are searched while about 10% of bla...
On Tuesday, September 23rd, I had the opportunity to do a ride along with the Takoma Park police department. My ride along was quite interesting. I rode with Officer Carl, a twenty-six-year-old officer who has been with the police department for six months. During the ride along we engaged in so many conversations concerning his work routine, and some the important things to be aware of as a police officer. Officer Carl and I were about the same age group so I felt much comfortable talking to him. Before I went for the ride along I had a different perspective about police work, I thought police work was much amusing and entertaining, but after the ride along with Officer Carl, I have realized that there is much more to police work and it often
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
Racial profiling occurs when authority uses someone’s race or ethnicity to decide whether or not to use enforcement. This controversial act is highly illegal and is mostly caused by stereotypes of certain races and ethnicities. Black males are mostly targeted due to the color of their skin, the type of car they drive, the genre of music they are listening to and how they are dressed. Some call this act DWB, driving while black. Black males are stopped and searched constantly with no probable cause just because of their race and gender. If a group of black males are riding in a car with hats on, and loud music they are more likely to get stopped than a group of white males doing the same thing. It is strongly believed that black males are racially profiled more often than any other race.
The Stop and Frisk program, set by Terry vs. Ohio, is presently being implemented by the New York Police Department. It grants police officers the ability to stop a person, ask them questions and frisk if necessary. The ruling has been a NYPD instrument for a long time. However, recently it has produced a lot of controversy regarding the exasperating rate in which minorities, who regularly fall under assault and are irritated by the police. The Stop, Question and Frisk ruling should be implemented correctly by following Terry’s vs. Ohio guidelines which include: reasonable suspicion that a crime is about to be committed, identifying himself as a police officer, and making reasonable inquiries.
Racial profiling occurs when a police officer uses a “profile” as reasonable suspicion to stop a person with the intent to obtain consent to search their belongings (Pollock, 2010). These stops are usually traffic stops and the officer is looking to obtain consent to search the individual’s automobile. The “profile” used is based on race. In these cases, an officer is using their discretion to target minority groups because they believe they are involved in criminal activities...
The ability of police to exercise discretion was originally designed to allow officers to maintain the peace by allowing certain types of crime to remain unpunished in certain circumstances. This essay will aim to explore the issue of police discretion that suggests that the application of discretion works against the interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. In drawing this conclusion, this essay will examine the relationship between policing ideals and the use of discretionary powers and the relationship between policing attitudes and the use of discretionary powers. A discussion regarding the use of police discretion towards Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples can scarcely be mentioned without making reference to arguably the greatest failing by a police officer since indigenous Australians were formally recognised as citizens. Further to this, the case of Mulrunji Doomadgee (Cameron) will be examined from the point of view of officer discretionary powers. The penultimate point to be made will involve the Anglo Australian response to this case as well as the ongoing relationship between indigenous Australians and the institutions that govern them. As mentioned, the first point will involve policing ideals and their relationship to discretionary powers.
Police psychology is broadly defined as the application of psychological principles and methods to law enforcement. With the popularity of television shows like Criminal Minds and Law & Order: SVU, the job of a police psychologist has become more well known and even popular. As seen on these shows, a police psychologist can be helpful in profiling a criminal, but they also provide many other services to the members of a police department. Although the development of this field has a long history, police psychology as a separate entity is still relatively recent and growing. This intimate relationship between psychology and law enforcement can be traced back to almost a century ago.[1] It first developed out of a need for a variety of psychological services in the law enforcement field, including screening applicants and counseling during grief and stress situations. In the time that it has been around, it has proved to be a valuable resource for the law enforcement profession.