In America there have been multiple tyrannical actions that the government have used on citizens and innocent bystanders. One of these actions are called “Stop and Frisk” which is a prevalent tactic used, especially in New York. “Stop and Frisk” means to be randomly searched by police or high authority when they suspect a bystander is carrying something suspicious. “Stop and Frisk” is a political issue that has been a concern for a long period of time.
According to the articles “Growing up with Stop and Frisk” by Sara Maria Glanowski and “Why Stop and Frisk Matters, Even if You Don’t Live in New York” by Andrew Cohen, the cons towards “Stop and Frisk” is clearly stated and relevant. People are being stopped based off racial profiling, while statistics proves that majority of the time, they are innocent. Stop and Frisk must be impermissible and abolished because it is unconstitutional and individuals are stopped based off appearance and not on evidence that proves there guilty.
Under the U. S constitution, the 4th amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures such as “Stop and Frisk”. The “Stop and Frisk” law allows police officers to stop someone if they have reasonable evidence, but tribunes are abusing that power by stopping individuals based off seeing furtive movements and not on actual evidence which is unconstitutional. In his article “Why Stop and Frisk Matters, Even if You Don’t Live in New York” Andrew Cohen States “One example of poor training is particularly telling.
Racial Profiling in the Criminal Justice system. Racial Profiling has been argued to be a very ineffective style of community policing in the criminal justice system. Using the New York City Police Department, “Stop, Question & Frisk” Policy as a model, I will show that profiling has led to lower crime rates which is shown from a current and historical point of view. Using history as a tool, ...
Two officers testified to their understanding of the term ‘furtive movements’. One explained that ‘furtive movements’ is a very broad concept, and could include a person ‘changing direction’…”. This is a shoddy reason to stop an individual based off furtive movements because it is important for police to muster evidence that proves an individual is guilty. In her article “Growing up with Stop and Frisk” Sara Maria Glanowski states “Earlier this week, a federal judge ruled NYPD’s stop-and-frisk tactics unconstitutional…”.
The United States constitution states that no warrants shall be issued without a probable cause. The reasonable suspicion must be based off of specific facts and not on an officer’s hysteria. The 4th amendment deters unreasonable “Stop and Frisk” and it’s time for the government to follow the constitution. Clearly, the police must stop violating the law and start abiding by the 4th amendment. “Stop and Frisk” has been used by the NYPD for a long period of time.
However in recent years it has had an alarming rate in communities of color which makes individual feel attacked and harassed by the police. The cops are racially profiling young black and Hispanic minorities, because majority of the time they are proven innocent and not guilty. In her article “Growing Up with Stop-and-Frisk”, Sara Maria Glanowski states “Of more than five million people stopped in New York during that decade, 4. 3 million were black or Hispanic.
Nearly 90 percent of those being stopped are released without a summons or an arrest”. This is a clear example of why “Stop and Frisk” which causes more harm than good, should be abolished. The statistics clearly proves that “Stop and Frisk” is based off racial profiling, inefficient and must be abolished. In his article “Why Stop and Frisk Matters, Even if You Don’t Live in New York”, Andrew Cohen states “In practice, the policy encourages the targeting of young black and Hispanic men based on their prevalence in local crime complaints”.
Even though race plays an important role in the description of a suspect, it is imperative that police collect valid evidence to “Stop and Frisk” an individual (Cohen, 2).
It is time for the police to stop harassing colored minorities based of their exterior not on ones hysteria. Evidently, the police are racial profiling and abusing young black and Hispanic youth. One would say that “Stop and Frisk” is beneficial and is important to keep communities safe. However, they overlook the fact that “Stop and Frisk” has a negative effect towards colored minorities.
Ethnicity and the Police Newspaper Article Assignment Part II: Final This newspaper article will begin from week two individual public opinion of police by different ethnic groups outline. Public opinion of police by different ethnic groups there are different types of ethnic groups African American, Hispanic’s and Latino’s American. Ranging from the White House to all over this nation sometime or ...
In her article “Saving Minority Lives” Heather Mac Donald states, “Ironically, police can’t respond to these heartfelt demands for public safety without generating ‘disproportionate’ stop data… ”. Nevertheless, as Glanowski states in his article, officers have conducted indirect racial profiling, disproportionately and illegally targeting blacks and Hispanics who wouldn’t be stopped had they been white. Undoubtedly, there should be evidence that proves a person is guilty, instead of stopping individuals based off appearance. In her article ‘Saving Minority Lives” Heather Mac Donald states “