The New York Police Department says its “stop-and-frisk” program — under which officers investigating crimes, or working to prevent crimes, briefly detain or pat down people on the streets — has played a pivotal role in driving down crime levels to record lows.
Editorial: A Trial for City Police
But civil rights groups and some criminologists are understandably troubled by new statistics showing that police officers stopped a record 575,000 people last year — nearly 90 percent black or Hispanic — and that the number of stops is growing as crime falls. Instead of dismissing such complaints, the Police Department should re-evaluate the program.
Credible questions about the racial fairness of stop-and-frisk were raised in 1999 in a study released by the state attorney general, then Eliot Spitzer. Conducted by a Columbia University statistician and reviewed by the editor of a reputable journal, it found that the program had disproportionately higher stop rates for blacks and Hispanics. The rates remained elevated even when they were adjusted to take account of higher crime rates and arrest rates in minority neighborhoods.
The Center for Constitutional Rights, which has sued the city, charging it with racial profiling, recently raised similar complaints. In an analysis released last year, it said that police officers used physical force more often against blacks and Hispanics than whites during stops. The group described 2009 as the worst year for the program on record, saying that “heavy-handed policing” in minority neighborhoods was promoting fear of police officers, which makes law enforcement more difficult.
The Police Department says the stops are necessary and that they make up a small fraction of the 23 million contacts that members of the force had with citizens last year. Police officials say minority citizens are more often stopped because many live in high-crime neighborhoods, where officers are often intensively involved in efforts to thwart car thefts, muggings and, especially, shootings. The department points with pride to the fact that the murder rate has reached an all-time low.
But the department’s statistics suggest that the stop-and-frisk tactic may be reaching a point of diminishing returns. In 2009, only 1.3 percent of the nearly 600,000 people stopped were caught with weapons. Just 6 percent were arrested. If the number of stops keeps going up — and officers begin to be seen as acting recklessly and unfairly — the department will risk permanently alienating an entire generation of people in the very neighborhoods where trust in the law is most needed.
5 comments:
damned if you do, damned if you don't
whats next? Forced to show your papers every time you cross a state or city border?
The police state and govt intrusion in our daily lives seems to be getting out of hand. Next, I wont even be able to carry a multitool or swiss army knife because that is a weapon.
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security"
- Ben Franklin
Darn right.
Picture this, a lady gets mugged in one of these neighborhood, she and witnesses say a young X minority male so tall wearing a hoodie (since this is Salisbury's MO). Cops then stop people in the area and profile based on the witness accounts. Do these groups argue in court that cops are supposed to stop white people in a X minority neighborhood regardless of what witnesses say? Do they not realize there aren't proportional numbers of many other races/ethnicities in a minority neighborhood. Just dumb!!!
3:21 what are talkin about bottom line is that police need to stop everyone in any neighborhood not jus minority neighborhoods. better yet police jus need to stop racial profling and i dont wanna hear they dont do that cause they do i know its happen to me before.espically in Salisbury
Post a Comment